Highway engineering handbook: building and rehabilitating the infrastructure

iii HIGHWAY ENGINEERING HANDBOOK Building and Rehabilitating the Infrastructure Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. Editor Pr...

Author: Roger Brockenbrough

139 downloads 1465 Views 8MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

iii

HIGHWAY ENGINEERING HANDBOOK Building and Rehabilitating the Infrastructure Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. Editor President R. L. Brockenbrough & Associates, Inc. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Third Edition

New York Chicago San Francisco Lisbon London Madrid Mexico City Milan New Delhi San Juan Seoul Singapore Sydney Toronto

iv

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Highway engineering handbook : building and rehabilitating the infrastructure / Roger L. Brockenbrough, editor.—3rd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-07-159763-0 (alk. paper) 1. Highway engineering—United States—Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Brockenbrough, R. L. TE23.H484 2009 625.7—dc22 2009002381 Copyright © 2009, 2003, 1996 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a data base or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 DOC/DOC 0 1 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 ISBN 978-0-07-159763-0 MHID 0-07-159763-8 Sponsoring Editor Larry S. Hager Editing Supervisor Stephen M. Smith Production Supervisor Richard C. Ruzycka Project Manager Anupriya Tyagi, International Typesetting and Composition Copy Editor Surendra Nath Shivam, International Typesetting and Composition Proofreader Ragini Pandey, International Typesetting and Composition Art Director, Cover Jeff Weeks Composition International Typesetting and Composition Printed and bound by RR Donnelley. McGraw-Hill books are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales promotions, or for use in corporate training programs. To contact a special sales representative, please visit the Contact Us page at www.mhprofessional.com. This book is printed on acid-free paper. Information contained in this work has been obtained by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (“McGraw-Hill”) from sources believed to be reliable. However, neither McGraw-Hill nor its authors guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein, and neither McGraw-Hill nor its authors shall be responsible for any errors, omissions, or damages arising out of use of this information. This work is published with the understanding that McGraw-Hill and its authors are supplying information but are not attempting to render engineering or other professional services. If such services are required, the assistance of an appropriate professional should be sought.

v

ABOUT THE EDITOR Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E., is an engineering consultant involved in the development of technical information to facilitate improved designs. He is also the editor of McGraw-Hill’s Structural Steel Designer’s Handbook. Mr. Brockenbrough is a member of the AISC Specifications Committee, Chair of the AISI Committee on Specifications for the Design of Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members, a past member of the Transportation Research Board Committee on Subsurface Soil-Structure Interaction, a member of the ASTM Committee on Corrugated Steel Pipe Specifications, and a Fellow and Life Member of ASCE. He was recently honored as a member of the Virginia Tech Civil and Environmental Engineering Academy of Distinguished Alumni.

vii

CONTENTS Contributors

xi

Preface to the Third Edition

xiii

Preface to the Second Edition

xv

Preface to the First Edition

xvii

Factors for Conversion to SI Units of Measurement

xix

Chapter Environmental Issues 1. James R. Brown and Samuel Less, AICP

1

1.1 Environmental Issues Affecting Highway Projects

2

1.2 Federal Requirements Governing Transportation Planning and the Environment

3

1.3 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)

5

1.4 Federal Requirements Governing Resource-Specific Environmental Aspects

23

1.5 Lead-Based Paint Removal

39

1.6 Resource Recovery and Use of Waste Material

52

Chapter Highway Location, Design, and Traffic 2. Larry J. Shannon, P.E.

67

2.1 Transportation Development Process

67

2.2 Geometric Design

76

2.3 Cross-Section Design

117

2.4 Intersection Design

147

2.5 Interchange Ramp Design

164

2.6 Collector-Distributor Roads

173

2.7 Multilane Ramp and Roadway Terminals and Transitions

175

2.8 Service Roads

181

2.9 Access to Public Roads

183

2.10 Driveway Design

183

2.11 The Cost of Congestion

195

2.12 Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems

197

2.13 High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

199

2.14 Highway Construction Plans

209

2.15 References Chapter Pavement Design and Rehabilitation 3. Aric A. Morse, P.E., and Roger L. Green, P.E.

221 223

3.1 Rigid Pavement

224

3.2 Flexible Pavement

232

3.3 Composite Pavement (Overlays)

233

3.4 Development of AASHTO Pavement Design Equations

233

3.5 Parameters for AASHTO Pavement Design

235

3.6 Rigid Pavement Design Procedure

257

3.7 Flexible Pavement Design Procedure

266

3.8 Pavement Management

270

viii

3.9 Methods of Pavement Rehabilitation

296

3.10 Pavement Preventive Maintenance

301

3.11 Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Pavements

306

3.12 Reference Material

309

Chapter 4. Bridge Engineering Walter J. Jestings, P.E., and Mahir Sen, P.E. 4.1 Client-Consultant Relationship

311

4.2 Aesthetic Considerations

313

4.3 Bridge Design Specifications

313

4.4 Bridge Geometrics

314

4.5 Basic Bridge Materials

316

4.6 Bridge Deck Materials and Systems

321

4.7 Concrete Bridge Deck Design

323

4.8 Concrete Bridge Deck Construction

324

4.9 Concrete Bridge Deck Protection

325

4.10 Deck Surfaces and Deck Overlays

327

4.11 Selection of Materials for Main Superstructure Members

327

4.12 Corrosion Protection of New Steel Bridges

328

4.13 Weathering Steel

329

4.14 Deflection and Expansion Joints

330

4.15 Continuity and Jointless Bridges

335

4.16 Characteristics and Selection of Bridge Types

336

4.17 Determination of Span Lengths

344

4.18 Bridge Widening and Rehabilitation

344

4.19 Repainting of Existing Bridges

346

4.20 Deck Drainage

347

4.21 Bridge Bearings

348

4.22 Provision for Inspection of New Bridges

354

4.23 Scour

354

4.24 Seismic Design

356

Chapter 5. Culverts, Drainage, and Replacements for Bridges Kevin E. White, P.E. 5.1 Hydrology

311

359 359

5.2 Design of Open Channels

371

5.3 Fundamentals of Open-Channel Flow

373

5.4 Design of Roadway Drainage

379

5.5 Hydraulic Design of Culverts

388

5.6 Culvert Types and Materials

403

5.7 Culvert Service Life

413

5.8 Structural Design of Drainage Pipes

418

5.9 Replacements for Bridges

459

5.10 Construction Methods

461

5.11 Inspection

464

5.12 Rehabilitation

470

Chapter 6. Safety Systems Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. 6.1 Concepts and Benefits of Roadside Safety

473 473

6.2 Application of Clear Zone Concept to Slope and Drainage Design

475

6.3 Sign and Luminaire Supports and Similar Features

483

6.4 Warrants for Roadside Barriers

488

ix

6.5 Characteristics of Roadside Barriers

491

6.6 Selection of Roadside Barriers

499

6.7 Placement of Roadside Barriers

502

6.8 Upgrading Roadside Barrier Systems

506

6.9 Median Barriers

506

6.10 Placement of Barriers on Sloped Medians

515

6.11 Bridge Railings and Transitions

517

6.12 Barrier End Treatments and Crash Cushions

522

Chapter Signing and Roadway Lighting 7. Part 1. Signing Brian L. Bowman, Ph.D., P.E.

533

7.1 Traffic Signing Needs

533

7.2 Crashworthy Concerns of Roadside Features

539

7.3 Design of Single-Mount Sign Supports

546

7.4 Slip Base Designs

562

7.5 Design of Multiple-Mount Sign Supports

566

7.6 Maintenance and Construction of Sign Supports

574

7.7 Fastening Sign Blanks on Single–Sign-Support Systems

588

7.8 Multiple–Sign-Mount Installation

594

7.9 Fastening Sign Blanks on Multiple–Sign-Support Systems

598

7.10 Guidelines for Multiple–Sign-Support Construction

602

7.11 Sign Vandalism Problems and Countermeasures

604

7.12 Maintenance of Traffic Signs

608

7.13 References on Signing

612

Part 2. Roadway Lighting C. Paul Watson, P.E., Nelson Russell, P.E., and Brian L. Bowman, Ph.D., P.E.

615

7.14 Benefits and Fundamentals of Lighting

615

7.15 Facility and Area Classifications

618

7.16 Freeway Lighting Considerations

620

7.17 Streets and Highways Other Than Freeways

623

7.18 Tunnel Lighting

624

7.19 Roadway Rest Areas

626

7.20 Analytical Approach to Lighting Warrants

628

7.21 Types of Luminaires

628

7.22 High Mast Lighting

635

7.23 Roadside Safety

636

7.24 Pole Types

639

7.25 Electrical Hazard

640

7.26 Foundations

642

7.27 Bases

646

7.28 Construction Considerations

649

7.29 Acceptance Tests

651

7.30 Maintenance Considerations

652

7.31 Impact Performance Criteria

653

7.32 Structural Design

655

7.33 References on Lighting

655

Chapter Retaining Walls 8. A. J. Siccardi, P.E., and S. C. (Trever) Wang, Ph.D., P.E.

657

8.1 Earth Retaining Wall Classification

658

8.2 Earth Pressure Considerations and Determination

670

x

8.3 Foundation Investigations and Soils Analysis

681

8.4 Rigid Retaining Walls

690

8.5 Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls

698

8.6 Nongravity Cantilevered Wall Design

738

8.7 Anchored Wall Design

743

8.8 Soil Nailed Structures

749

8.9 Prefabricated Modular Walls

767

8.10 MSE Bridge Abutment Walls

767

8.11 Reference Material

772

Chapter 9. Noise Barriers James J. Hill, P.E., and Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. 9.1 Acoustical Concepts

775 776

9.2 Acoustical Standards and Design

777

9.3 Types of Noise Barriers

778

9.4 Noise Barrier Selection

779

9.5 Aesthetics

780

9.6 Safety Considerations

784

9.7 Maintenance Considerations

784

9.8 Project Development Steps

785

9.9 Structural Design

787

9.10 Foundation Design

791

9.11 Construction

792

Chapter 10. Value Engineering and Life Cycle Cost Harold G. Tufty, CVS, FSAVE 10.1 FHWA Role in Value Engineering

797 797

10.2 AASHTO Role in Value Engineering

803

10.3 Value Engineering Job Plan Concept

808

10.4 Value Engineering Job Plan Detail

809

10.5 Fast Diagramming and the Job Plan

820

10.6 Cost Model

825

10.7 Worth Model

825

10.8 Considerations in Life Cycle Cost Analysis

826

10.9 Categories of Costs

828

10.10 Methods of Calculation

829

10.11 Examples of Successful VE Highway Studies

830

Index

835

xi

CONTRIBUTORS Brian L. Bowman, Ph.D., P.E. Professor of Civil Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama (Chap. 7) Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. President, R. L. Brockenbrough & Associates, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Chaps. 6, 9) James R. Brown National Director, Transportation Environmental Programs, HDR Engineering, Inc., New York, New York (Chap. 1) Roger L. Green, P.E. Pavement Research Engineer, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio (Chap. 3) James J. Hill, P.E. Structural Engineer, Consultant, Anoka, Minnesota (Chap. 9) Walter J. Jestings, P.E. Formerly, Bridge Engineer, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia (Chap. 4) Samuel Less, AICP Planning Director, Transportation Environmental Programs, HDR Engineering, Inc., New York, New York (Chap. 1) Aric A. Morse, P.E. Pavement Design Engineer, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, Ohio (Chap. 3) Nelson Russell, P.E. Manager, Electrical Department, Volkert & Associates, Mobile, Alabama (Chap. 7) Mahir Sen, P.E. Professional Associate, PB Americas, Inc., Newark, New Jersey (Chap. 4) Larry J. Shannon, P.E. Highway Technical Manager, ms Consultants, Columbus, Ohio (Chap. 2) A. J. Siccardi, P.E. Formerly, Staff Bridge Engineer, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colorado (Chap. 8) Harold G. Tufty, CVS, FSAVE Editor and Publisher, Value Engineering and Management Digest, Washington, D.C. (Chap. 10) S. C. (Trever) Wang, Ph.D., P.E. Senior Engineer, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colorado (Chap. 8) C. Paul Watson, P.E. Formerly, State Electrical Engineer, Alabama Department of Transportation, Montgomery, Alabama (Chap. 7) Kevin E. White, P.E. Principal Hydraulic Engineer, E. L. Robinson Engineering, Columbus, Ohio (Chap. 5)

xiii

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION Improvements in highway design methods and practices are reflected in this Third Edition of the handbook. The chapter on environmental issues has been updated throughout in view of ever-evolving regulations in that area. The chapter on highway design includes information from the latest AASHTO “Green Book.” The trend to replace bridges with spans up to about 60 ft (18 m) with stiffened special long-span corrugated steel and precast concrete drainage structures is documented in the chapter on culverts. The chapter on safety systems shows the trend to use median barriers over wider median widths than in the past. Metric units have been added throughout the text and in tables and figures wherever feasible. The reader is cautioned that independent professional judgment must be exercised when information set forth in this handbook is applied. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use. Readers are encouraged to use the latest edition of referenced specifications and guides, because they provide more complete information and are subject to frequent change. Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E.

xv

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION This new edition of the handbook has been updated throughout to reflect continuing changes and improvements in design trends and specifications. The chapter on bridge engineering has been revised to provide more comprehensive treatment of this important topic. The chapter on culverts and drainage provides updated hydraulic design information as well as the latest approved methods for the structural design of concrete, steel, and plastic pipes. The chapter on retaining walls has been expanded with new information on mechanically stabilized earth walls, including a section on bridge abutment walls. Significant new information has been added to the chapter on value engineering to reflect the current roles of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Engineers (AASHTO); additional examples of applications have been included, too. Regrettably, this edition of the handbook marks the passing of Kenneth Boedecker, a friend and colleague active in highway engineering applications for many years. His contributions, particularly in the development of improved specifications for drainage pipe and other products, are gratefully acknowledged. Finally, the reader is cautioned that independent professional judgment must be exercised when information set forth in this handbook is applied. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use. Readers are encouraged to use the latest edition of the referenced specifications, because they provide more complete information and are subject to frequent change. Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E.

xvii

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION The Highway Engineering Handbook has been developed by knowledgeable engineers to serve as a comprehensive reference source for those involved in highway design. This handbook is broad in scope, presenting information on topics ranging from environmental issues to value engineering, from the design of culverts, lighting, and noise walls to the design of safety systems, retaining walls, and bridges. In addition, such fundamental subjects as location and pavement design are fully discussed. This volume should be useful to a wide range of personnel involved in highway design and construction, including consulting engineers; engineers employed by departments of transportation in federal, state, and local governments; those involved with turnpike authorities; and engineering educators. Both experienced practitioners and serious students will find the information presented here useful and easy to apply. It should enable the engineer to create a design that fulfills the requirements of the highway user: a safe, smooth, durable, aesthetically pleasing, environmentally sensitive, and economical highway system. Contributors to this handbook are experienced highway engineers, consultants, or educators. They are leading authorities in their subject areas. The guiding principle of this book is to present practical information that has direct application to situations encountered in the field. Efforts were made to coordinate the information with that of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Metric units are used where feasible to ease the transition to that system. The material in this book follows a logical sequence. It begins with a discussion of environmental issues, a fundamental consideration in modern highway design. This is followed by a chapter on location, design, and traffic that includes extensive examples of typical standard treatments. A subject critical to building and maintaining durable systems, pavement design and rehabilitation, is then presented. Following this, aspects of bridge engineering are discussed to aid in the selection of bridge type and material for a durable design. The essentials of culvert design are then offered, as well as information on the various culvert types available. Next, a discussion of roadway safety addresses the latest options for providing for errant vehicles that leave the traveled way. A wealth of information follows on signing and lighting highways, subjects that also are closely related to highway safety. A comprehensive chapter next addresses the selection and design of retaining walls and considers both generic and proprietary systems. Walls to reduce traffic noise and screen unsightly areas are then considered. Finally, a chapter on value engineering and life cycle cost presents fundamental insights into these areas, as well as application examples, to encourage cost-effective design. The contributors and editors are indebted to their colleagues and a variety of sources for the information presented. Credit is given in references throughout the text to the extent feasible. The reader is cautioned that independent professional judgment must be exercised when information given in this handbook is applied. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use. Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. Kenneth J. Boedecker, Jr., P.E.

xix

FACTORS FOR CONVERSION TO SI UNITS OF MEASUREMENT Multiply

By

To find

Length: Inches (in)

25.400

Millimeters (mm)

Feet (ft)

0.3048

Meters (m)

Yards (yd)

0.9144

Meters (m)

Miles (mi)

1.6093

Kilometers (km)

Area: Square inches (in2)

645.16

Square millimeters (mm2)

Square feet (ft2)

0.09290

Square meters (m2)

Square yards (yd2)

0.8361

Square meters (m2)

Square miles (mi2)

2.5900

Square kilometers (km2)

Acres (ac)

0.4047

Hectares (ha)

Mass: Ounces (oz)

28.350

Grams (g)

Pounds (lb)

0.4536

Kilograms (kg)

Tons, short (T)

0.9072

Megagrams (Mg), or tonnes

Volume: Ounces, fluid (oz)

29.574

Milliliters (mL)

Gallons (gal)

3.7854

Liters (L)

Cubic feet (ft3)

0.02832

Cubic meters (m3)

Cubic yards (yd3)

0.07646

Cubic meters (m3)

1.6093

Kilometers per hour (km/h)

Pound (lb)

4.4482

Newton (N)

Kip

4.4482

Kilonewton (kN)

Pounds per square inch (lb/in2)

6.8948

Kilopascal (kPa)

Kips per square inch (kips/in2)

6.8948

Megapascal (MPa)

Velocity: Miles per hour (mi/h) Force:

Stress:

Kips per square foot (kips/ft2)

47.880

Kilopascal (kPa)

CHAPTER 1

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES James R. Brown National Director Transportation Environmental Programs HDR Engineering, Inc. New York, New York

Samuel Less, AICP Planning Director Transportation Environmental Programs HDR Engineering, Inc. New York, New York

Environmental concerns play a major role in the planning, design, construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance of highways. This chapter provides an overview of the major environmental concerns affecting highway projects and includes a summary of the federal environmental statutes, regulations, policies, and guidance material that must be addressed in their development. Included is a detailed discussion of the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 USC §4321 et seq., the key federal environmental statute affecting the development of highway projects. Provided is a thorough description of the process and substance required to prepare environmental documents under NEPA, including environmental assessments (EA) and environmental impact statements (EIS). This chapter also includes a summary of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) requirements governing the planning and development of highway projects included in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act—A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59, “SAFETEA-LU”), and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (Title 49 USC §1653(f), “Section 4(f)”). Also provided is an overview of the major federal resource-specific environmental legislation and regulations not under the jurisdiction of DOT that highway planners and engineers must address during project development. The chapter concludes with a thorough discussion of alternative means to remove leadbased paint from steel bridge structure, and the potential use of waste material in the construction and maintenance of highways, including the recycling of hazardous wastes within highway projects.

1

2

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AFFECTING HIGHWAY PROJECTS Highway projects have the potential to result in significant social, environmental, and economic effects and, as a consequence, are the subject of a broad range of environmental regulation. Potential impacts include effects on • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Community cohesion Land use Minority and disadvantaged populations Surface and groundwaters Wetlands Coastal zone resources Navigable waters Wild, scenic, and recreational rivers Flood plains Water quality Important ecological resources, including wetlands and threatened and endangered species Significant historic and archaeological resources Important visual resources Public parklands Utilities Prime agricultural lands Air quality Noise Energy Exposure to contaminated and hazardous materials Public health

Recent court rulings also suggest the need to consider potential effects on global climate change and related ecological impacts. The impacts of highway projects may be both temporary (short-term effects that occur during construction of a facility) and permanent (long-term effects resulting from the operation of a facility). Both short- and long-term impacts can be direct, indirect, or cumulative. • Direct impacts are effects directly caused by an action that occur at the same time and place and result from the direct use of land or resources. • Indirect impacts are effects indirectly caused by an action and are later in time or farther removed in distance from the location of a facility, but which are still reasonably foreseeable, including growth inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density, or growth rate. • Cumulative impacts are impacts which result from the incremental impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

3

of what agency or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. All of these effects must be considered in evaluating the environmental impacts of highway projects.

1.2 FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS GOVERNING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND THE ENVIRONMENT The following discussion is intended to provide an overview of the principal federal requirements affecting the development and maintenance of highways. These include federal laws, regulations, executive orders, agency advisories, policy memoranda, and guidance documents. Federal laws are enacted legislation that establish a set of rules or principles codified in the United States Code (USC). Federal regulations implement federal laws and are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). DOT and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA are codified in 23 CFR Part 771 (United States Department of Transportation Environmental Impact and Related Procedures), and 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508 (Council on Environmental Quality Regulations Implementing NEPA). Environmental regulations have been promulgated by each federal agency. These include regulations promulgated by DOT, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and can be found in the CFRs of the specific agency having jurisdiction over the environmental issue of concern. In addition to NEPA and the resource-specific legislation summarized in Art. 1.3 of this chapter, there are a number of DOT requirements that affect the planning and environmental review of highway projects. These include • • • •

Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (23 USC §303) The Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-240) The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178) The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59, “SAFETEA-LU”) • The National Highway Designation Act of 1995 (Section 29 of USC Title 23) Provided below are brief descriptions of each of these statutes. Section 4( f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (23 USC §303, “Section 4( f)”). Section 4(f) prohibits the administrator of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) from approving the use of land from a significant publicly owned park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or any significant historic site for transportation purposes unless a determination is made that • There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of land from the property. • The action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from such use.

4

CHAPTER ONE

In addition, supporting information must demonstrate that there are unique problems or unusual factors involved in the use of alternatives that avoid these properties (“Avoidance Alternatives”) or that the cost, social, economic, and environmental impacts, or community disruption resulting from such alternatives reach extraordinary magnitudes. Section 6009(a) of SAFETEA-LU made the first substantive revision to Section 4(f) since its enactment in 1966. This section of SAFETEA-LU attempts to simplify the Section 4(f) process for projects that have only de minimis impacts on resources protected by Section 4(f). Under the new provisions, once DOT determines that a transportation use of a Section 4(f) resource results in a de minimis impact, analysis of avoidance alternatives is waived and the Section 4(f) process is deemed complete. Guidance for determining de minimis impacts to Section 4(f) resources was issued by FHWA and DOT on December 13, 2005. Section 6009(c) of SAFETEA-LU requires DOT to conduct a study and issue a report on the implementation of these new Section 4(f) provisions. The initial study and report is to address the first 3 years of its implementation. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-240, “ISTEA”). ISTEA was almost revolutionary in the breadth of how it looked at surface transportation, and the substantive role it played in regard to metropolitan planning organizations, localities, and states. Covering the period 1992 through 1997, it restructured the Federal Aid Highway Program, and placed the emphasis on maintenance rather than wholesale expansion of the highway network. In creating the Surface Transportation Program, ISTEA brought a new level of flexibility to the planning and implementation of highway and transit projects. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178, “TEA-21”). Enacted on June 9, 1998, TEA-21 authorized the Federal Surface Transportation Program for highways, highway safety, and transit for the 6-year period, 1998–2003, and increased the authorized funding level to $218 billion from $155 million under ISTEA. TEA-21 built upon ISTEA, allowing new initiatives, strengthening safety, and encouraging flexibility in how to maximize performance of the transportation system. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users of 2005 (Public Law 109-59, “SAFETEA-LU”). SAFETEA-LU built upon both ISTEA and TEA-21 included expanded programs in the areas of safety, equity, innovative financing, congestion relief, mobility and productivity, efficiency, and environmental stewardship. Of particular relevance to the consideration of environmental concerns affecting the development and implementation of highway projects, it included a number of changes aimed at streamlining the environmental review process. A new category of “participating agencies” was added to provide state, local, and tribal agencies with a formal role in the environmental review process, required that a schedule be defined for the participation of agencies in the project review process, established a 180-day statute of limitations for lawsuits challenging federal agency approvals, allowed for broader state assumption of responsibilities for categorical exclusions from environmental review, exempted the Interstate System from Section 4(f) and National Historic Preservation Act requirements (although individual segments may receive protection), modified the requirements for determining whether the conformity of local and statewide transportation plans conform to the Federal Clean Air Act, and, as previously discussed, included tightly circumscribed exemptions from “Section 4(f)” requirements. National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-59, Section 109 of Title 23, USC). Following the substantial completion of the Interstate System, the transportation focus for many states shifted to congestion management and system preservation


5

projects that involve existing facilities. Working with community stakeholders to preserve and enhance the human and natural environment is a significant component of these projects. To address the challenges resulting from this new emphasis, many state transportation agencies and professional organizations have implemented a “context-sensitive design” (CSD) approach to project development. The National Highway System Designation Act (Section 109 of Title 23, USC) was enacted in November 1995. The act indicated that design for new construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, restoration, or rehabilitation of highways on the National Highway System (other than a highway also on the Interstate System) may take into account • The constructed and natural environment of the area • The environmental, scenic, aesthetic, historic, community, and preservation impacts of the activity • Access for other modes of transportation Five pilot states (Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, and Utah) were selected to implement the CSD approach to highway design. Principles for CSD can be found on the FHWA website at www.fhwa.got.gov/csd/principles.

1.3 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 (NEPA) NEPA is the most important federal environmental legislation to be considered in the planning and development of highway projects. NEPA was enacted by Congress in December 1969 and signed into law by President Nixon on January 1, 1970. It was the first comprehensive environmental law in the United States and established the country’s national environmental policies. To implement these policies, NEPA requires federal agencies to assess the environmental effects of its discretionary actions prior to making decisions on such actions. Actions subject to NEPA include such activities as the financing or approving of projects or programs; the adoption of agency regulations and procedures; the permitting of private and public actions; and a broad range of other actions. As indicated in Section 101 of NEPA, its purpose is “to declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)”, within the executive office of the president. In addition to the agency specific regulations implementing NEPA, DOT and its constituent agencies have identified the process and methods to be used to assess environmental impacts under NEPA in a number of orders, technical advisories, and memoranda. These include Order 5610.1C, Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (9/18/1979), which established procedures for consideration of environmental impacts in decision making on proposed DOT actions. A draft revision to this order has been considered by DOT (Draft Order 5610.1D, 7/5/2000), but has not been finalized. Further guidance for preparing environmental documents under NEPA is provided in FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A, Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents (10/30/1987), the Federal Aid Policy Guide (FAPG), and a number of FHWA Policy Memoranda (see Table 1.1).

6

CHAPTER ONE

TABLE 1.1 FHWA Office of Planning, Environment, and Real Estate—Selected Policy Memoranda Issued date 8/17/06 7/31/06 5/25/06 4/4/06 3/29/06 2/15/06 2/14/06 2/3/06 1/13/06 3/10/05 4/28/99 3/12/97 10/28/96 12/15/95 12/13/95 10/11/95 7/25/95 7/5/95 6/12/95 2/3/95 11/8/94 8/22/94 4/19/94

Subject Guidance on 23 USC §328 Environmental Restoration and Pollution Abatement Memorandum on Improvement of NEPA Documents Highway Traffic Noise Section 6004: State Assumption of Responsibility for Categorical Exclusions Transportation Conformity Guidance for Qualitative Hot-Spot Analysis in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Release of FHWA Construction Noise Model (FHWA RCNM) Version 1.0 Interim Guidance for Implementing the Transportation Conformity Provisions in the SAFETEA-LU Interim Guidance for Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents Guidance for Applying the 4(f) Exemption for the Interstate Highway System Federal-Aid Eligibility of Wetland and Natural Habitat Mitigation Guidance on the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) Eligibility of ISTEA Funds to Mitigate Historic Impacts to Wetlands NEPA Requirements for Transportation Enhancement Activities Memorandum of Understanding to Foster the Ecosystem Approach Use of Private Wetland Mitigation Banks Highway Noise—The Audible Landscape: A Manual for Highway Noise and Land Use Participation in Funding for Ecological Mitigation Use of Private Wetland Mitigation Banks as Compensatory Mitigation for Highway Project Impacts Highway Traffic Noise Guidance and Policies and Written Noise Policies Analyzing Exempt Projects in the Conformity Process Federal Interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Interim Guidance of Applying Section 4(f) on Transportation Enhancement Projects and National Recreational Trails Projects Wetland Delineation and Mitigation

Additional guidance is provided in common law resulting from litigation concerning environmental matters. Judicial review may result in clarification or invalidation of all or parts of environmental regulation. There is an extensive body of law that has resulted from such review. 1.3.1 The Environmental Impact Assessment Process under NEPA An outline of the steps in the NEPA process is presented in the following discussion and illustrated in Fig. 1.1. Determination of the Level of Documentation Needed to Comply with NEPA. Highway projects are usually initiated by a state or local transportation agency. If it is anticipated that a major federal action is required to implement a project, it must comply with NEPA. Conversely, projects that do not require a major federal action do not require review under NEPA. These minor actions include projects that are “categorically excluded” from detailed review under NEPA and for which a minimal level of environmental documentation is required. A list of categorical exclusions is provided

7


Proposed Agency Action

Categorical Exclusion or Other Exemption Exclusion

No

Applies

Exclusion

Environmental Assessment No

EIS

EIS

Required Notice of Intent

Scoping Process

Draft EIS

Agency/Public Review & Comment

Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)

Final EIS

Record of Decision

Agency Action

Agency Action

Agency Action

FIGURE 1.1 Overview of NEPA environmental review process. (From R. E. Bass and A. I. Herson, Mastering NEPA: A Step-by-Step Approach, Solano Press Books, Point Arena, Calif., 1993, with permission)

in Tables 1.2 and 1.3. The following are examples of actions that would trigger the need to comply with NEPA. • The proposed use of federal funds for the planning, engineering, or construction of a project, or for needed right-of-way acquisition • Modifications to an existing interstate highway • Modifications to a non-interstate access-controlled highway that affects the right-of-way previously financed with federal funds

8

CHAPTER ONE

TABLE 1.2

Actions Categorically Excluded from Further Review by FHWA

1. Activities that do not involve or lead directly to construction 2. Approval of utility installations along or across a transportation facility 3. Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities 4. Activities included in the state’s highway safety plan under 23 USC §402 5. Transfer of federal lands pursuant to 23 USC §317 when the subsequent action is not an FHWA action 6. Installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly owned buildings to provide for noise reduction 7. Landscaping 8. Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals, and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption will occur 9. Emergency repairs under 23 USC §125 10. Acquisition of scenic easements 11. Determination of payback under 23 CFR §480 for property previously acquired with federalaid participation 12. Improvements to existing rest areas and truck-weigh stations 13. Ride-sharing activities 14. Bus and railcar rehabilitation 15. Alterations to facilities or vehicles in order to make them accessible for elderly and handicapped persons 16. Program administration, technical assistance activities, and operating assistance to transit authorities to continue existing service or increase service to meet routine changes in demand. 17. Purchase of vehicles by the applicant where the use of these vehicles can be accommodated by existing facilities or by new facilities which themselves are within a categorical exclusion 18. Track and railbed maintenance and improvements when carried out within the existing rightof-way 19. Purchase and installation of operating or maintenance equipment to be located within the transit facility and with no significant impacts off the site 20. Promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives Source:

Adapted from 23 CFR 771.117(c).

If a project is subject to NEPA, a determination must then be made regarding the level of analysis and process to be completed to comply with NEPA. The type of environmental documentation that is required must be made in consultation with FHWA, which, in turn, coordinates the review of a proposed action with other involved federal agencies. Based on coordination with FHWA, a project could require one of the three levels of environmental documentation: • Documentation supporting the project status as a categorical exclusion (CE). • Projects for which an environmental assessment is required to make a final determination of whether an Environmental Impact Statement is required. • Projects for which an environmental impact statement is required.


9

TABLE 1.3 Actions Generally Excluded from Further NEPA Review But Subject to FHWA Approval 1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or auxiliary lanes 2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects, including the installation of rampmetering control devices and lighting 3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings 4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities 5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas 6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse impacts 7. Approvals for changes in access control 8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominately for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support vehicle traffic 9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users 10. Construction of bus-transfer facilities (an open area consisting of passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks, and related street improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high-activity center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic 11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominatly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise impact on the surrounding community 12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes Source:

Adapted from 23 CFR 771.117(d).

A determination of the extent of environmental documentation is based on a preliminary environmental evaluation of a proposed action to determine whether: • The proposed action falls within the definitions of projects that are categorically excluded from NEPA review. • The proposed action has the potential to result in one or more significant environmental impacts. • Measures are reasonably available that could mitigate potential environmental effects thereby eliminating the potential for significant environmental impacts. • The project has unusual level of public controversy that may warrant preparation of an EIS. Categorical Exclusions. CEQ regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1508.4) require that each federal agency identify the types of actions under its purview that would not individually or cumulatively result in significant environmental impacts. These projects, designated as categorical exclusions, are exempt from the need to prepare an EA or EIS. FHWA has identified two sets of projects that may be categorically excluded from detailed review under NEPA. The first group of actions is found in 23 CFR 771.117(c) and

10

CHAPTER ONE

is provided in Table 1.2. These are actions that have been categorically found not to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. The second group of actions is found in 23 CFR 771.117(d) and is provided in Table 1.3. These include actions that have been found generally not to result in significant adverse environmental impacts, but for which FHWA must make a final determination. When satisfied that the project meets one or more exclusion criteria and that other environmentally related requirements have been met, FHWA will indicate approval by signing a Categorical Exclusion form. A copy of documentation required to support this determination must be sent to FHWA by the sponsoring agency. In certain cases, FHWA has reached agreement with sponsoring agencies on the treatment of very routine, repetitive projects with little or no environmental impact implications. Such projects may be processed on the basis of a “programmatic” categorical exclusion if certain specified conditions are met. Use of this programmatic process is subject to annual review by FHWA. Classification of a project as a categorical exclusion does not exclude a project from the requirements of other federal environmentally related processes. These requirements must be met before FHWA will make an exclusion determination. In addition, Congress may, at its discretion, also exempt a specific federal project or program from NEPA through specific legislation. Environmental Assessments. An EA is conducted for projects that are not categorically excluded and for which it is not clear whether an EIS is required. The primary purpose of an EA is to help FHWA decide whether an EIS is needed. Consequently, an EA should provide the evaluations critical to determining whether a proposed action would result in a significant impact on one or more of the environmental resources considered under NEPA, thereby necessitating a more complete analysis in an EIS. If it is determined that a proposed action does not have the potential to result in one or more significant environmental impacts, then FHWA will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), thereby terminating the environmental review process under NEPA. If it is determined that a proposed action has the potential to result in one or more significant impacts, then FHWA has the option to require that an EIS be prepared. Contents and Format of an EA. The contents of an EA are determined through agency and public scoping, preliminary data gathering, and field investigation. These steps will identify potentially affected resources and the level of analysis that is necessary to identify whether an action would have the potential to result in a significant environmental impact. The EA should be a concise document, including only the data and technical analyses needed to support decision making, and be focused on determining whether the proposed action would have a significant effect on the environment. It is not necessary to provide detailed assessments of those resources for which significant environmental impacts are very unlikely. In addition to a cover sheet and table of contents, the following elements should be included in an EA: • • • • •

Purpose and need for the proposed action Project description and alternatives Environmental setting, impacts, and mitigation Comments and coordination Appendices (as necessary)


11

• Section 4(f) evaluation (if required) • EA revisions (if required) Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action. A succinct description of the purpose and need for the proposed action should be provided at the beginning of the EA. The need for the project should be based on an objective evaluation of current information and future anticipated conditions. This section of the EA should identify the transportation problem(s) or other needs which the proposed action is intended to address (40 CFR 1502.13). The section should clearly demonstrate that a need exists and should define the need in terms understandable to the general public. The statement of purpose and need will form the basis for identifying of reasonable alternatives and in selecting a preferred alternative. Consistent with joint FHWA and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidance (July 23, 2003 Joint Memorandum from Mary E. Peters, administrator of FHWA and Jennifer L. Dorn, administrator of FTA), the Purpose and Need Statement must be as concise and understandable as possible. Although it serves as the cornerstone for the subsequent identification and evaluation of alternatives, it should not specifically discuss any alternative or range of alternatives, nor should it be so narrowly drafted that it unreasonably points to a single solution, thereby circumventing necessary environmental review before a selection is made. In general, the “need” for an action should be defined as the transportation system deficiencies that will be addressed by the action, while the “purpose” for the action should be described as the objectives that will be met to address the deficiencies. Table 1.4 identifies the types of information that could be incorporated into the EA to demonstrate the need for a proposed action. Project Description and Alternatives. Included in this section of the EA should be a project description written in clear, nontechnical language. It should include the location and geographic limits of the project and its major design features and typical sections; a location map (district, regional, county, or city map depicting state highways, major roads, and well-known features to orient the reader to the project location); a vicinity map TABLE 1.4 Information to Establish Need for Highway Projects Project status: Briefly describe the project history including actions taken to date, other agencies and governmental units involved, action spending, schedules, etc. System linkage: Is the proposed project needed as a “connecting link”? How does the project fit in the transportation system? Capacity: Is the capacity of an existing facility inadequate for the present and projected traffic? Would the proposed project provide needed additional capacity? What is the level(s) of service for existing and proposed facilities? Transportation demand: Is the project identified in an adopted statewide or metropolitan transportation plan as needed to meet current or projected demand? Legislation: Is there a federal, state or local governmental mandate for the action? Social demands or economic development: Is the project needed to address projected economic development or changes in land use? Modal interrelationships: Is the proposed project needed to interface with and complement airports, rail and port facilities, or mass transit services? Safety: Is the proposed project needed to correct an existing or potential safety hazard? Is the existing accident rate excessively high compared to that of similar facilities in the region or state? Roadway deficiencies: Is the proposed project needed to correct existing roadway deficiencies (e.g., substandard geometrics, load limits on structures, inadequate cross-section, or high maintenance costs)?

12

CHAPTER ONE

(detailed map showing project limits and adjacent facilities); current status of the project including its relation to regional transportation plans, regional transportation improvement programs, congestion management plans, and the state transportation improvement program; proposed construction date; funding source(s); and the status of other projects or proposals in the area. For projects that include more than one type of improvement, the major design features of each type of improvement should be included. The description of the project should clearly indicate the independence of the action by • Identifying and providing the basis for establishing the “logical termini” (project limits) of the action • Establishing the separate utility of the action from other actions of the agency • Establishing that the action does not foreclose the opportunity to consider other actions • Confirming that the action does not irretrievably commit federal funds for closely related projects Reasonable alternatives to the project should be discussed, including consideration of a no-action option, which is mandated under both CEQ and FHWA regulations. The EA may either discuss (1) the preferred alternative and identify any other alternatives considered or (2) if a preferred alternative has not been identified during previous planning studies, the alternatives under consideration. The EA does not need to evaluate in detail all reasonable alternatives for the project, and may be prepared for one or more build alternatives. Project alternatives can be classified into two types: viable, and those studied but no longer under consideration. Viable alternatives should be described in sufficient detail to compare their effectiveness against the proposal in meeting the project purpose and need, and to assess potential impacts and estimate cost. Alternatives no longer under consideration should be explained briefly and the reasons provided for their elimination. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation. The EA should include a description of the environmental setting in which the proposed action would be located. The description should be succinct and maximize the use of visual displays to reduce the need for extensive narrative. Beyond a general description of contextual background, the discussion should focus on those features that have the greatest potential to be significantly affected by the proposed action. The EA should discuss any social, economic, and environmental impacts whose significance is uncertain. The level of analysis should be sufficient to adequately identify the impacts and available measures to mitigate impacts, and to address known and foreseeable public and agency concerns. Impact areas that do not have a reasonable possibility for individual or cumulative environmental impacts need not be addressed. The reasons for determining why any impacts are not considered to be significant should be provided. If more than one alternative is involved, the evaluation must identify the impacts associated with each alternative being evaluated. The EA should identify the technical studies and backup reports used in making the assessment and indicate where they are available. A list of environmental resource categories to be considered in both EAs and EISs is included in Table 1.5. Feasible measures that reduce or eliminate potential impacts of a proposed action should be identified. Measures may be presented as potential commitments that may be selected for implementation by the lead agency. Alternatively, these measures can be incorporated as elements of the proposed action, thus avoiding impacts. Measures to mitigate impacts may diminish the intensity of project effects to the point that they would not be considered to be significant, and could make the project eligible for a FONSI. Based on the results of these evaluations, a determination is made of whether the anticipated effects of the project represent a significant environmental impact thereby requiring


13

TABLE 1.5 Environmental Resource Categories to Be Considered in the Preparation of Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements 1. Land use impacts 2. Farmland impacts 3. Socioeconomic impacts, including disproportionate adverse impacts on disadvantaged and minority populations (environmental justice) 4. Relocation impacts 5. Considerations relating to pedestrians and bicyclists 6. Air quality impacts 7. Noise impacts 8. Water quality impacts 9. Wetland impacts 10. Water body modification and wildlife impacts 11. Floodplain impacts 12. Wild and scenic rivers 13. Coastal barriers 14. Coastal zone impacts 15. Threatened or endangered species 16. Historic and archeological preservation 17. Hazardous waste sites 18. Visual impacts 19. Energy 20. Construction impacts 21. Relationship of local short-term uses vs. long-term productivity 22. Irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources 23. Cumulative impacts

the preparation of an EIS. This determination is based on a review of the context and intensity of the impact. Context refers to the setting within which the proposed project is being developed. Intensity refers to the severity of an impact and will vary by resource type. Factors to consider in determining intensity of an impact include • The degree to which the action may affect public health or safety. • The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment may result in a significant level of public controversy. • Whether the action may result in cumulatively significant impacts when added to the effects of other planned and programmed projects and activities separate from the proposed action. • Whether the action has the potential to violate one or more federal, state, or local laws or standards intended to protect the environment. Factors to be considered in determining the context include • Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to public, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas.

14

CHAPTER ONE

• The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. • The degree to which the action may adversely affect threatened or endangered species of their habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Comments and Coordination. Determination of the need for an EIS or whether the FHWA can issue a FONSI can only be made after the EA has been made available for agency and public review. This section of the EA should summarize the efforts taken to coordinate with agencies and the public, identify the key issues and pertinent information received through these efforts, and list the agencies and members of the public consulted. Public involvement is an essential element of the NEPA process, and the proposing agency must take proactive steps to encourage and provide for early and continuing public participation in the decision-making process [40 CFR 1506(a)]. Opportunities for public involvement are provided at several stages during the development of NEPA documents, such as at the publication of the notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS, during the process used to scope the environmental document, and during the process afforded to agencies and the public to review the environmental document. Opportunity for the public to review and comment on the completed (draft) EA occurs upon publication of a notice of availability of the draft document. Such notice may be published in local newspapers or other local print media, presented in special newsletters, provided to community and business associations, placed in legal postings, and presented to interested Native American tribes, if appropriate. For an EIS, publication of such notice is also required in the Federal Register. Notices and other public announcements regarding the project should be sent individually to those who have expressed an interest in a specific action. Early incorporation of public input on project alternatives and issues dealing with social, economic, and environmental impacts helps in deciding whether to prepare an EIS, in determining the scope of the document, and in identifying important or controversial issues to be considered. When impacts involve the relocation of individuals, groups, or institutions, special notification and public participation efforts should be undertaken. Early and ongoing public involvement will assist in gaining consensus on the need for the action and in identifying and screening alternatives. A public hearing is not mandated to receive comment on an EA but is required for public review of a draft EIS. The proposing agency must provide for one or more public hearings to be held at a convenient time and place for federal actions that require significant amounts of right-of-way acquisition, substantially change the layout or function of connecting roadways or of the facility being improved, have substantial adverse impact on abutting properties, or otherwise have a significant social, economic, or environmental effect [23 CFR 771.111(h)(2)(iii)]. During public hearings, the public should be provided with information on the project’s purpose and need and with how the project relates to local and regional planning goals, the major design features of the project, its potential impacts, and the reasonable alternatives under consideration including the no-action alternative. Areas of special interest to the public, such as needed right-of-way acquisition and the proposed displacement and relocation of existing uses, should be carefully explained, as should the agency’s procedures and timing for receiving oral and written public comments [23 CFR 771.111(h)(2)(v)]. The public comment period for a draft EIS is at least 45 days. All public comments received during the public comment period, including during public hearings must be documented. Appendices (if any). Appendices to the EA should include the analytical information that substantiates the principal analyses and findings included in the main body of the document.


15

Section 4(f) Evaluation (if any). As described in Art. 1.2 of this chapter, a Section 4(f) evaluation may be required if a project would require the use of land from a significant publicly owned public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or any significant historic site. If a Section 4(f) evaluation is required, it may be included as a section within the EA. If included within the EA, a separate “avoidance alternatives evaluation” need not be repeated in the EA. In all cases, the Section 4(f) evaluation must be circulated for review in conformance with 23 CFR 771.135(i) requirements. EA Revisions. An EA should be revised subsequent to public review to (1) reflect changes in the proposed action, impact assessment, or mitigation measures resulting from comments received on the EA, (2) include any necessary findings, agreements, or determinations made as a consequence of the concurrent reviews under Section 4(f) or other regulatory requirements, and (3) include a copy of pertinent substantive comments received on the EA and appropriate responses to the comments. Finding of No Significant Impact. After review of the EA and any other appropriate information, the FHWA may determine that the proposed action would not result in any significant impacts, and issue a FONSI. The FONSI should briefly present the reasons why the proposed action would not have a significant effect on the human environment or require the preparation of an EIS. The FONSI should document compliance with NEPA and other applicable environmental requirements. If full compliance with all these other requirements is not possible by the time the FONSI is published, the FONSI should document consultation with the affected agencies to date and describe how and when the other requirements will be met. There is no requirement to publish a record of decision (ROD) for a FONSI, nor is there a legally mandated requirement to distribute the FONSI. However, the FHWA must send a notice of availability of the FONSI to federal, state, and local government agencies likely to have an interest in the undertaking and the state intergovernmental review contacts [23 DFR 771.121(b)]. It is encouraged that agencies that have comments on the EA (or requested to be informed) be advised on the project decision and the disposition of their comments, and be provided a copy of the FONSI. Environmental Impact Statement. A federal agency must prepare an EIS if it is proposing a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment (40 CFR §1501.7). The regulatory requirements for an EIS are more extensive than the requirements for an EA. The steps to be followed in preparing an EIS are depicted in Fig. 1.1. Once the lead agency determines that an action would result in a significant measurable impact, development of a draft enviornmental impact statement (DEIS) is initiated through a public and agency notification and scoping process focused on early identification of the major issues of concern and alternatives for study. This process includes confirmation of FHWA as the agency to lead the environmental review process, identification of cooperating agencies, distribution of a letter of initiation of the environmental process from the sponsoring agency, publication of a notice of intent to prepare an EIS, invitation to agencies to become participating agencies in the environmental review process, and completion of scoping activities. Each of these steps is described in the following discussion. Lead Agency Determination. In accordance with Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU, DOT is designated as the federal lead agency for the “environmental review process” for any surface transportation project that requires a DOT approval. The environmental review process includes both NEPA and other reviews. The lead agency is responsible for taking actions within its authority to facilitate the resolution of the environmental review process. It also is responsible for preparing the required NEPA document for the

16

CHAPTER ONE

project, or ensuring that one is prepared. Other federal agencies that have jurisdiction by law, or that have special expertise with respect to any environmental issue that should be addressed in the EIS may be a cooperating agency upon request of the lead agency. An agency may also request that the lead agency designate it as a cooperating agency. Each cooperating agency must (1) participate in the NEPA process at the earliest possible time, (2) participate in the scoping process described below, (3) assume on request of the lead agency responsibility for developing information and preparing environmental analyses including portions of the EIS concerning issues which the cooperating agency has special expertise, and (4) make staff available to enhance the lead agency’s interdisciplinary capability. Dissemination of Letter of Initiation. In accordance with Section 6002 of SAFETEALU, a project sponsor has the responsibility to notify DOT that the environmental review process for a project “should be initiated.” This notice of initiation, which can take the form of a letter or other form of notice, should identify the type of work, termini, length, and general location of the project. It should also identify any federal approvals that the project sponsor believes will be necessary, including all anticipated environmental reviews, permits, and consistency determinations. Publication of Notice of Intent. The EIS process begins with the publication of a notice of intent (NOI) stating the agency’s intent to prepare an EIS for the proposed action. The NOI is published in the Federal Register, and provides basic information on the proposed action in preparation for a subsequent “scoping process.” The NOI should include a description of the purpose and need for the proposed action similar to that included in an EA. In addition, it includes a brief description of the proposed action and possible alternatives, and a description of the process proposed by the sponsoring agency to identify the scope of the EIS. This should include any proposed scoping meetings and other methods proposed for public involvement in the environmental review process. The NOI should also identify the agency point of contact for the project, who can respond to questions concerning the proposed action and the NEPA process. The NOI should emphasize the lead agency’s commitment to collaborate with others interested in the proposed action and to describe how it intends to engage interested parties throughout the analysis. The publication of the NOI in the Federal Register can be supplemented by issuing other forms of notice such as announcements on websites, newspapers, newsletters, and other forms of media. The format and content of the notice of intent are included in FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A. Invitation to Participating Agencies. In addition to publication of an NOI, Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU requires that the lead environmental agency designate as “participating agencies” (a new term created under SAFETEA-LU) all other governmental agencies—federal or nonfederal—that may have an interest in the project, and invite them to participate in the environmental review process for the project. Such designation and invitation should occur as early in the environmental review process as is practicable. Any federal agency that is invited to participate in the process must accept the invitation unless that agency notifies the lead agency in writing by the deadline specified in the invitation that (1) it has no jurisdiction or authority over the project, (2) it has no information or expertise relevant to the project, and (3) it does not intend to submit comment on the project. Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU further mandates that the lead agency must establish a plan for coordinating public and agency participation in the environmental review process, including for all federal environmental reviews for the project, not just DOT reviews. Optionally, the lead agency may establish a schedule for completion of the environmental review process after consultation with all participating agencies and the state and project sponsor. SAFETEA-LU directs “each federal agency, to the maximum extent practicable,” to (1) carry out all reviews required under other laws concurrently with the review required in NEPA, and (2) formulate and implement mechanisms to enable the agency to ensure the


17

completion of the environmental review process in a “timely, coordinated, and environmentally responsible manner.” Scoping. “Scoping” is an early and open process for determining the breadth of issues to be addressed in an EIS, the range of alternatives to be considered, and the methods to be applied in evaluating the effects of an action. The objectives of scoping are to • Invite the participation of affected federal, state, and local agencies, any affected Indian tribe, and other interested persons (including those who might not be in accord with the action on environmental grounds). • Identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues that are not significant or that have been covered by prior environmental review. • Allocate assignments for preparation of the EIS among the lead and cooperating agencies. • Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements so FHWA and cooperating agencies may prepare other required analyses and studies concurrently with the EIS. • Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of environmental analyses and the planning and decision-making schedule. Notification and implementation of scoping is achieved through public agency involvement procedures required by 23 CFR 771.111. Preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The principal purpose of the DEIS is to disclose to the decision makers and the public the probable impacts of reasonable alternative that have the potential to meet the purpose and need of a proposed action. Responsible decisions can be then made after public review and comment based on an assessment of the degree to which competing alternatives meet the need for the action and by balancing their relative environmental, social, and economic impacts. Preparation of the DEIS should begin at the earliest practical time. A key element should be the early exploration of alternatives and their relative ability to meet the purpose and need for the proposed action. This will assist in identification of reasonable alternatives and allow early coordination with cooperating and responsible agencies. The DEIS should be concise and include succinct statements, evaluations, and descriptions of conclusions. Lengthy, encyclopedic discussions of subject matter diffuse the focus of the document from its analytical purpose. The document should be easily understood by the public and written to emphasize the significant environmental impacts of competing alternatives. Discussions of less significant impacts should be brief, but sufficient to demonstrate that due consideration was given and more detailed study not warranted. CEQ regulations emphasize brevity and stress the importance of focusing on significant issues and avoiding detailed discussion of less important matters. Normally, EISs should be less than 150 pages, or less than 300 pages if the action is unusual in scope and complexity. Exhibits (charts, tables, maps, and other graphics) are useful in reducing the amount of narrative required. Adequacy of a DEIS is measured by its functional usefulness in decision making, not by its size or amount of detail. This is especially applicable in the executive summary of the document, where items relating to alternatives and their impacts and related mitigation can be presented in a matrix format, thereby minimizing the need for narrative. Contents and Format of the Draft EIS. In accordance with 40 CFR 1502.10 and FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A, an EIS should be prepared in accordance with the following outline unless compelling reasons to do otherwise are given by the proposing agency: • Cover sheet • Executive summary

18

• • • • • • • • • • •

CHAPTER ONE

Title page Table of contents Purpose and need for the proposed action Alternatives Affected environment Environmental consequences Mitigation measures List of preparers List of who received copies Appendixes Index

Cover Sheet. The cover sheet should clearly indicate the name of the project, its location, date of publication of the DEIS, and the responsible sponsoring and environmental lead and cooperating agencies. Executive Summary. A summary should be given that provides an overview of the entire DEIS and be no greater than 10 to 15 pages in length. The summary should include the following information: • Briefly describe the proposed project, including the route, termini, type of facility, number of lanes, length, county, city, and state, along with significant appurtenances, as appropriate. • List other federal actions required for implementation of the project, including required permits. Also describe other major actions proposed by other governmental agencies in the same geographic area as the proposed project. • Summarize all reasonable alternatives considered. • Summarize the major environmental impacts of each alternative, both beneficial and adverse. • Identify proposed measures to reduce or avoid identified impacts. • Briefly describe any areas of concern (including issues raised by agencies and the public) including any important unresolved issues. Title Page. The title page should identify the name of the proposed action, and its geographic limits and location, the date of the DEIS, and any relevant report number identified by the sponsoring agency and FHWA. The proposing agency must be clearly identified, including the name, address, and telephone number of a primary contact person. All agencies that serve as cooperating agencies should also be identified. A brief one paragraph abstract should be included, providing a description of the proposed action and its alternatives, a summary of significant impacts, and major mitigation measures. The title page should also identify the date by which comments on the DEIS must be received. Table of Contents. A table of contents should be included in the document and consider all areas of concern identified during the scoping process. Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action. The DEIS should include a description of the purpose and need for the proposed action. The information provided should be similar to that provided in an EA, as described earlier in this chapter. Alternatives. The lead agency must “objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives, and for alternatives which were eliminated from detailed study, briefly discuss the


19

reasons for their having been eliminated” (40 CFR §1502.14). Reasonable alternatives are those that substantially meet the purpose and need for the proposed action, and include those that are practical or feasible from the technical and economic standpoint, rather than simply desirable from the standpoint of the applicant or the public. Agencies are obligated to evaluate all reasonable alternatives or a range of reasonable alternatives in enough detail so that a reader can compare and contrast the environmental effects of the various alternatives. Both improvement of existing highways and facilities on new locations should be considered, as appropriate to the need for the action. A representative number of reasonable alternatives must be presented and evaluated in detail in the DEIS. For most major projects, there is a potential for a large number of reasonable action alternatives. Only a representative number of the most reasonable approaches, covering the full range of alternatives, should be presented. The number of reasonable alternatives will depend on the project location and pertinent project issues. Each alternative should be briefly described using maps or other visual aids such as photographs, drawings, or sketches. A clear description should be presented of the concept, major design features, termini, location, and costs for each alternative. More detailed design of some aspects may be necessary for one or more alternatives to evaluate impacts or mitigation measures, or to address issues raised by other agencies or the public. However, equal consideration must be given to all alternatives. All reasonable alternatives considered should be developed to a comparable level of detail in the draft EIS so that their comparative merits may be evaluated. Where a preferred alternative has been identified, it should be so indicated. The DEIS should include a statement that the final selection of an alternative will not be made until the impacts of the alternatives and public comments on the DEIS have been fully evaluated. Where a preferred alternative has not been identified, the DEIS should state that all reasonable alternatives are under consideration and that a decision will be made only after the impacts of the alternatives and comments on the DEIS have been fully evaluated. Both CEQ and FHWA regulations implementing NEPA require consideration of a “no-action” alternative. The no-action alternative is the condition that would occur if FHWA did not implement the proposed action, but may be different from the existing condition due to implementation of other actions separate from those of the proposed action if the proposed action was not authorized. For highway projects, the no-action alternative would at least include those reasonably foreseeable maintenance and safety actions required to continue operation of the facility under consideration. Affected Environment. This section of the DEIS describes in concise terms the social, economic, and environmental setting for the alternatives under consideration. The limits of the study area(s) should be based on an assessment of the extent of potential impact for each impact category. Impact categories should include those listed in Table 1.5. Only aspects of the setting relevant to assessing the environmental impacts of proposed alternatives should be discussed in detail, with other descriptions limited to that necessary to provide context. Environmental Consequences. The major significant impacts of the project should be discussed in detail in the environmental consequences section for each of the categories for which a description of the affected environment is provided. The analysis of impacts should consider all issues raised during the project’s public and agency-scoping process. The analysis must include consideration of the full range of short- and long-term, and direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the preferred alternative, if any, and of the reasonable alternatives identified in the alternatives section of the DEIS. Effects to be considered include ecological, aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, and public health impacts, whether adverse or beneficial (40 CFR §§1508.7, 1508.8). Mitigation Measures. This section of the DEIS should specify measures to lessen the adverse environmental impacts of alternatives identified in the environmental consequences

20

CHAPTER ONE

section of the DEIS. For an impact mitigation measures to be considered usable it must be effective, economically feasible and the agency must be capable of and committed to implementing the measure. Under CEQ regulations, mitigation can be achieved by avoiding the adverse impact, minimizing the adverse effect by reducing the scope of the project, implementing a program to reduce the impact over time, or compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources. List of Preparers. A list should be provided of the names and appropriate qualifications (professional license, academic background, certification, professional working experience, and special expertise) of the persons who were principally responsible for preparing the DEIS or substantial background papers. The list should include any project sponsor, FHWA and consultant personnel who had primary responsibility for preparing or reviewing the DEIS. DEIS Distribution List. The draft EIS must list the names and addresses of the agencies and organizations that were sent copies of the DEIS for review. Comments and Coordination. The draft EIS should contain pertinent correspondence summarizing public and agency coordination, meetings, and other pertinent information received. Glossary and Abbreviations. A glossary and list of abbreviations should be included as an aid to those not familiar with the project development process and technical issues being considered in the DEIS. References and Bibliography. A clear, concise listing of references and bibliographical material should be included. Appendices. Appendices should contain the reports and documents that support the findings of the DEIS. Detailed technical discussions and analyses that substantiate the concise statements within the body of the DEIS are most appropriately placed in the appendices. Appendices must either be circulated with the draft EIS or be readily available for public review. Index. An index to the DEIS should be provided to assist the reader in locating topics of interest. Public Review and Comment. Upon completion, the DEIS is made available for public review and comment. Review of the DEIS should supplement the public outreach activities to date. A notice of availability of the DEIS should be published in the Federal Register and in newspapers of general circulation in the vicinity of the project site. Hard copies of the DEIS should be provided at libraries and other locations in the vicinity of the geographic area that would be potentially affected by the proposed action. Electronic copies of the DEIS and its supporting documentation should also be made available on the website of the sponsoring agency. Provisions should be made for major foreign language populations in the area, including the publication of notices in the language of major non-English speaking populations in the area, and the provision of translators at any public hearings. The notice of availability of the DEIS should indicate the date by which public comments must be received and the dates, times, and locations of any public hearing(s) on the DEIS. Adequate notice should be provided to any public hearings to allow sufficient time for public examination and assessment of the DEIS. All substantive comments received on the DEIS during the public review period, including all written comments and oral comments received at any public hearing on the DEIS, should be documented and summarized. Responses must be prepared to all substantive comments. Responses to nonsubstantive comments and gratuitous remarks on the DEIS are not required. Final EIS. Upon completion of the public comment period on the DEIS, an analysis is completed of the comments received, necessary revisions are made to the analyses and

21

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TABLE 1.6 Contents of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Item Cover sheet Executive summary

Need for action Alternatives

Affected environment Environmental consequences Mitigation and other List of preparers List of who received DEIS Appendixes Index Distribution list Comments and coordination

Content The cover sheet must indicate FEIS. The executive summary should incorporate any changes between the DEIS and FEIS, identify the preferred alternative, and concisely describe all mitigation measures, including monitoring and enforcement measures for any proposed mitigation measure, where applicable. No revisions from the DEIS unless warranted by comments received on the DEIS. The preferred alternative should be identified and described in a separate section of the FEIS. A defensible rationale should be provided for selection of the preferred alternative. This rationale must reflect a comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the various alternatives considered. No substantive change from that included in the DEIS unless warranted by comments received on the DEIS. No substantive changes unless warranted by comments received on DEIS. The FEIS should identify all mitigation measures. No substantive change unless comments warrant. No substantive change unless comments warrant. No substantive change unless comments warrant. No substantive change unless comments warrant. Indicate on the list those entities commenting. This section provides a list of those commenting on the DEIS, including copies of comments received and responses to all substantive comments.

conclusions in the DEIS, and a final EIS (FEIS) is prepared. The FEIS must document and include responses to all substantive comments received on the DEIS from public agencies and the public (40 CFR §1502.18). Responses to comments can be made in the form of changes to the text and analyses included in the DEIS, factual corrections, new alternatives considered or an explanation of why a comment does not require a response (40 CFR §1503.4). A copy or summary of substantive comments and the responses to them must be included in the FEIS [40 CFR §1503.4(a)]. The contents of an FEIS is provided in Table 1.6. If not already identified in the DEIS, the FEIS should identify the preferred alternative to be recommended for implementation. The preferred alternative could be one of the reasonable alternatives considered in the DEIS or an alternative that is a composite or variant of the reasonable alternatives considered in the DEIS. If the preferred alternative will involve the use of a resource protected under Section 4(f), a final Section 4(f) evaluation must be prepared and included as a separate section of the FEIS or as a separate document. When completed, the FHWA will publish the FEIS and EPA will publish a notice of availability of the FEIS in the Federal Register. A minimum of 30 days must pass after publication of the FEIS before FHWA can make a final decision on the proposed action (40 CFR §1504).

22

CHAPTER ONE

Record of Decision. Preparation and publication of a record of decision (ROD) by FHWA is the final step in the EIS process. The ROD documents the decisions made by FHWA for the proposed action, including identification of the preferred alternative, and the measures identified to mitigate any identified adverse impacts of the preferred alternative, including the commitments and plans to enforce and monitor implementation of the measures (40 CFR §1505.2). The ROD also discloses the bases for the agency’s decision, including the reasons for whether to proceed with the proposed action. The ROD must also discuss whether all practical means have been applied to avoid or minimize environmental harm have been adopted, and, if not, why they were not (40 CFR §1505.2). The ROD must be made publicly available by publication in the Federal Register or on the agency website, or both. Environmental Reevaluation and Supplemental EIS. An environmental reevaluation (ER) of the FEIS is prepared when any of the following circumstances occur: • An acceptable FEIS is not submitted to FHWA within 3 years from the date of circulation of the DEIS. • No major steps have been taken to advance a project (e.g., allocation of a substantial portion of right-of-way or construction funding) within 3 years from the date of approval of the FEIS. • When there have been lengthy periods of inactivity between major steps to advance the project. The purpose of the reevaluation is to determine whether there has been a substantial change in the social, economic, and environmental effects of the proposed action. This could result from changes in the project itself or from changes in the context under which the project is to be undertaken. A supplemental EIS should be prepared when there are changes that result in significant impacts not previously disclosed in the original document. An EIS may be supplemented or amended at any time and must be supplemented or amended when (1) changes to the proposed project would result in significant environmental impacts that were not disclosed in the EIS or (2) new information or circumstances relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed project or its impacts would either bring to light or result in significant environmental impacts not evaluated in the original document. The supplemental EIS need only address those subjects in the original document affected by the changes or new information.

1.3.2 State Environmental Review Legislation Fifteen states and the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have enacted environmental policy acts, which, because they are largely modeled on NEPA, are collectively referred to as “Little NEPAs.” A list of these statutes is provided in Table 1.7. Highway projects may be affected by these state-specific environmental requirements, which, in general, follow or expand upon federal objectives and programs. In some instances, the state defers to the NEPA process, while, in others, the state reviews proceed as independent but parallel and coordinated efforts. In addition, increasingly, states are being given powers to implement federal programs, leading to their further involvement in the environmental review of highway projects. For example, under SAFETEA-LU, Congress provided for a process whereby some states could assume responsibilities for all environmental compliance for highway projects, including NEPA.


23

TABLE 1.7 “Little NEPAs” Jurisdiction Arkansas California Connecticut District of Columbia Florida Hawaii Indiana Maryland Massachusetts Minnesota Montana New York State North Carolina Puerto Rico South Dakota Virginia Washington Wisconsin

Little NEPA citation Ark. Stat. Ann. §8-1-101 Cal. Pub.Res. Code §§21000 et seq. Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §§22a-14 et seq. D.C. Code Ann. §§6-981 et seq. Fla. State. §§380.92 et seq. Haw. Rev. Stat. §§343-1 et seq. Ind. Code Ann. §§13-12-4-1 et seq. Md. Nat. Res. Code Ann. §§1-301 et seq. Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. Ch 30 §§61 et seq. Minn. Stat. Ann. §§116D.01 et seq. Mont. Code Ann. §§75-1-101 et seq. N.Y. Envil. Conserv. Law §§8-0101 et seq. N.C. Gen. Stat. §§113A-1 et seq. P.R. Laws Ann. Tit. 12, §§1121 et seq. S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §§34A-9-1 et seq. Va. Code §§10.1-1200 et seq. Wash. Rev. Code §§43-21C 010 et seq. Wis. Stat. §§1.11 et seq.

1.4 FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS GOVERNING RESOURCE-SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS In addition to the federal requirements governing the planning and implementation of highway projects, a number of federal statutes and regulations have been promulgated to protect the environment. The responsibility and authority associated with these requirements are assigned to a number of federal agencies, or delegated to the states. A listing of key federal environmental requirements is provided in Table 1.8. Environmental requirements are also included in a number of executive orders issued by the President of the United States that mandate policy on specific issues, including orders concerning the protection of wetlands, floodplains, significant cultural resources, disadvantaged and minority populations, marine resources, and energy supply. Relevant executive orders are included in Table 1.9.

1.4.1 Federal Requirements Protecting Air Quality and Noise Clean Air Act (42 USC §7401–7626). The 1970 amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA) provided a comprehensive approach to regulating the nation’s air quality. The CAA addressed both mobile and stationary air pollution sources and required the EPA to set and enforce national ambient air quality standards (NAAQSs). The CAA has been amended several times since 1970. Amendments to the CAA that were adopted in 1990 were particularly extensive and included provisions for stricter mobile source emissions, as well as restrictions on emissions linked to stationary sources including hazardous or toxic pollutants. EPA has overall authority for the implementation of CAA requirements. Pursuant to the CAA, EPA established primary and secondary NAAQSs for six pollutants: ozone, carbon

24

CHAPTER ONE

TABLE 1.8 Major Federal Environmental Legislation and Regulations/Responsible Agencies Clean Air Act (42 USC §7401 et seq.)/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Noise Control Act, amended 1978 (42 USC §§4901-4918)/U.S. EPA Clean Water Act, 1972 (33 USC §1251 et seq.)/U.S. EPA, Army Corps of Engineers Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA; 42 USC §300)/U.S. EPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 1974, amended 1984 (42 USC §6901 et seq.)/ U.S. EPA Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 1976 (15 USC §260 et seq.)/U.S. EPA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 1980 (42 USC §9601 et seq.)/U.S., EPA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 1986 (42 USC §6991 et seq.)/U.S. EPA Farmland Protection Policy Act, 1981 (73 USC §4201 et seq.)/U.S. Department of Agriculture Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, 1972 (16 USC §§1451-1464)/U.S. Department of Commerce Wild and Scenic Rivers Act 1968, (16 USC §§1271-1287)/U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 1934 (16 USC §§661-666)/U.S. DOI U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) 1973 (16 USC §£1531-1543)-U.S., DOI, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, DOC, National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) Rivers and Harbors Act, 1899 (33 USC §401, et seq.)/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), USCG National Historic Preservation Act 1966 (16 USC §470 et seq.)—Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Historic Buildings Act of 1935 (16 USC §£461-471)/National Park Service/DOI The Archaeological and Historical Preservation Act, 1974 (16 USC §469)/DOI Archaeological Resources Act, 1979 (16 USC §470 et seq.)/DOI Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990/DOI Department of Transportation Act, Section 4(f), 1966, (49 USC §303)/DOT Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965, Section 6(f) (16 USC §§460l-4 through 460l-11)/DOI American Indian Religious Freedom Act, 1978 (42 USC §1996) Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Properties Acquisition Act, 1970 (42 USC §4601)

monoxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter. The CAA also regulates hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) released by chemical plants, dry cleaners, printing plants, and motor vehicles. States are responsible for meeting CAA objectives by developing state implementation plans (SIPs). SIPs integrate regulations with other measures designed to meet NAAQS and associated CAA requirements. Federal agencies must comply with the approved SIP of the state in which they are operating. Many SIPs include air quality goals that exceed federal requirements and carry their own set of penalties and fines for noncompliance. Current provisions of CAA relevant to highway engineering are included in Title I (Attainment and Maintenance of NAAQS), Title II (Mobile Sources), and Title VII (Enforcement). Title I addresses air pollution control requirements for “nonattainment areas,” (i.e., those metropolitan areas in the United States that have failed to meet NAAQSs.) Ozone is the most widespread pollutant in nonattainment areas. Therefore, the focus of controls in these areas is on controlling the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides that are precursors to the formation of ozone. Title II regulates tailpipe emissions from motor vehicles and sets emission limitations for carbon monoxide,


25

TABLE 1.9 Executive Orders Affecting Highway Projects Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management (January 24, 2007) Executive Order 13352, Executive Order Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation (26 August 2004) Executive Order 13274, Environmental Stewardship and Transportation Infrastructure Project Reviews (18 September 2002) Executive Order 13212, Actions To Expedite Energy-Related Projects (18 May 2001) Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (18 May 2001) Executive Order 13186, Responsibilities of Federal Agencies To Protect Migratory Birds (10 January 2001) Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments (6 November 2000) Executive Order 13158, Marine Protected Areas. (26 May 2000) Executive Order 13150, Federal Workforce Transportation (21 April 2000) Executive Order 13141, Environmental Review of Trade Agreements (16 November 1999) Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species (3 February 1999) Executive Order 13089, Coral Reef Protection (11 June 1998) Executive Order 13057, Federal Actions in the Lake Tahoe Region (26 July 1997) Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (21 April 1997) Executive Order 13031, Federal Alternative Fueled Vehicle Leadership (13 December 1996) Executive Order 13006, Locating Federal Facilities on Historic Properties in our Nation’s Central Cities (21 May 1996) Executive Order 12969, Federal Acquisition and Community Right-To-Know (8 August 1995) Executive Order 12902, Energy Efficiency and Water Conservation at Federal Facilities (8 March 1994) Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (11 February 1994) Executive Order 12889, Implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (28 December 1993) Executive Order 12856, Federal Compliance With Right-To-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements (3 August 1993) Executive Order 12843, Procurement Requirements and Policies for Federal Agencies for Ozone-Depleting Substances (21 April 1993) Executive Order 12123, Offshore Oil Spill Pollution (26 February 1979) Executive Order 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions (4 January 1979) Executive Order 12088, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards (13 October 1978) Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands (24 May 1977) Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management (24 May 1977) Executive Order 11912, Delegation of Authorities Relating to Energy Policy and Conservation (13 April 1976)—partially revoked by Executive Order 12919 Executive Order 11514, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality (3/1970) as amended by Executive Order 11991 (24 May 1977) Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment (1971)

26

CHAPTER ONE

hydrocarbon, and nitrogen oxides. Provisions for enforcement under Title VII include fines and terms of imprisonment. Federal violations prosecuted by EPA may result in civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day and criminal enforcement if the violator fails to abate on notice [42 USC §7413(b)]. If a SIP is not effective in achieving NAAQSs in a nonattainment area, EPA may prepare an implementation plan of its own and/or impose construction bans on stationary sources, or withhold EPA-approved federal funds (such as transportation improvement grants) targeted for the state. Transportation Conformity. The CAA required EPA to promulgate rules to ensure that federal actions do not impede efforts to attain or maintain compliance with the NAAQS. These rules require that metropolitans and statewide transportation plans conform to CAA requirements. These transportation conformity regulations apply to highways. The transportation conformity rules published under 40 CFR 93, address this requirement with respect to actions of certain transportation agencies, including funding or approvals, that involve projects in nonattainment and maintenance areas, (i.e., areas that were previously designated as nonattainment but currently in compliance with the NAAQS). The transportation conformity rule established the criteria and procedures by which the FHWA, the FTA and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) determine the conformity of federally funded or approved highway and transit plans, programs, and projects to SIPs. Conformity ensures that transportation plans, programs, and projects do not result in new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. Noise Control Act (NCA) 42 USC §4901–4918. The Noise Control Act (NCA) was enacted to control noise emitted from human activity. The NCA include two requirements that are relevant to highway engineering: (1) the required developing of state and local programs to control noise, and (2) the required controlling the sources of noise of surface transportation and construction activities. The NCA also created the EPA Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC). ONAC promulgated regulations to implement the NCA (40 CFR 201 through 211). Noise limits for motor vehicles involved in interstate commercial activities are identified in 40 CFR 202. While noise emissions from construction equipment and compressors are regulated by 40 CFR 204. Noise limits and measurement procedures for trucks over 10,000 lb and motorcycles are included in 40 CFR 205. Control of highway noise is currently under the jurisdiction of FHWA. FHWA noise regulations are found in 23 CFR 772 and include the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC). The NAC include maximum noise levels for various of land uses from adjacent highways. When highway noise levels approach or exceed the NAC, or when highway noise significantly increases above existing noise levels, noise abatement measures must be considered. FHWA allows individual states to define “approach” and “significant increase.” Typically, “approach” means within 1 or 2 dB and “significant increases” are typically defined as increases of 10 or 15 dB above existing noise levels.

1.4.2 Federal Requirement Protecting Water Resources and Sensitive Ecological Resources Clean Water Act (33 USC §1251 et seq. CWA). The CWA was enacted in 1977 as amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. Its stated goal is to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” The CWA gave EPA the authority to implement pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry. The CWA also contained requirements to set water quality standards


27

for all contaminants in surface waters, and provided funding for the construction of sewage treatment plants under the construction grants program. It also recognized the need for planning to address the critical problems posed by nonpoint source pollution. One of the mechanisms to achieve the objectives of the CWA is the prohibition of discharges, including dredge and fill material, into navigable waters. The CWA made it unlawful for any person to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained under its provisions. Sections 402 and 404 of the CWA establish two complementary permit programs through which appropriate federal or state officials may authorize the discharge of pollutants. Section 402 of the CWA has led to development of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) under which permits are issued for the discharge of material that is other than dredge or fill, including storm water runoff from highway facilities into navigable waters. Under subsections 402(p)(2)(C) and (D) of the CWA, storm water permits are necessary for discharges from a municipal separate storm sewer system serving an incorporated or unincorporated area with a population over 100,000. The EPA definition of municipal separate storm sewer is “a conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains).” The definition goes on to specify that the system of conveyances may be owned by any of a number of types of municipal governing bodies and specifically includes states, that the conveyances must be specifically designed for the purpose of collecting or conveying storm water, and that they are not to be part of a combined sewer or part of a publicly owned treatment works (POTW). Section 404 of the CWA has led to the development of a permit program administered by the USACOE for the deposition of dredged or fill materials into navigable waters. The definition of navigable waters has been contested in several recent Supreme Court decisions that have begun to limit the reach of the CWA permit authority in wetlands to areas that have a significant nexus with navigable waters. In June 2007, the EPA and USACOE issued agency guidance regarding CWA jurisdiction following two of these recent decisions the consolidated cases Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States [126 S. Ct. 2208 (2006)]. States often have overlapping jurisdiction with the USACOE regarding permitting of actions within navigable waters. State permits related to navigation and wetland encroachment are common and need to be taken into account when developing a project. State programs are usually more restrictive, with a more expanded definition of wetland boundaries or a regulated buffer zone. In two states—Michigan and New Jersey—some permitting authority has been ceded to the state, simplifying the process. The CWA prohibits storm waters from being used to transport or collect wastes and requires that standards for water pollution be established that do not diminish the uses of the water. EPA has the authority to develop a framework of regulation that can be fully delegated to states once the EPA has approved their regulatory program. The CWA requires states to establish a policy of nondegradation that protects and preserves water (J. T. Dufour, California Environmental Compliance Handbook, California Chamber of Commerce, Sacramento, 1993, pp. 72–74). In the preamble of the November 1990 amendments to the CWA, EPA explains its decision to include state-owned highways as municipal separate storm sewers. EPA identifies discharges from state highways as a significant source of runoff and pollutants and as one of the “issues and concerns of greatest importance to the public” (Federal Register, Part II, Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR 122, 123, and 124, November 16, 1990, p. 48039). To avoid the problems associated with multiple permittees for systemwide discharges, the CWA regulations include a method whereby interconnected systems owned and operated by local agencies and state-owned highways in areas of medium to high population

28

CHAPTER ONE

may be combined into a single permit. The regulations allow the state transportation agency to be named as a copermittee in a systemwide permit, or to be named in a separate municipal permit. (E. M. Jennings, “Coverage of State Highways under Municipal Storm Water Permits,” Memorandum, Office of Chief Counsel, California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, November 2, 1992, p. 31.) Storm water systems owned by state highway departments in low-population areas (under 100,000) are not required to be permitted. Appendixes to Part 122 indicate the incorporated areas and unincorporated counties in the United States with sufficient population to require municipal storm water permits. This information is shown in Table 1.10. Application requirements for a group permit for discharges from large and medium municipal storm sewers fall into two parts. Also, an annual report must be submitted, as discussed later. Storm Water Permits for Construction. EPA in 1990 established final regulations for controlling storm water runoff from specific categories of industries and activities (40 CFR 122, 123, and 124). Any discharger of, or person who proposes to discharge, a waste other than to a sewer system, or changes the character of a current discharge, is required to report this activity to the local enforcement agency (Dufour, op. cit., p. 75). Once reported, the agency will evaluate the discharge and may • Issue waste discharge requirements. • Waive discharge requirements for insignificant discharges such as well testing or construction dewatering (no waiver is permitted if the discharge is to surface waters). • Prohibit the discharge if sufficiently protective discharge requirements cannot be met by the discharger. Discharge requirements are issued through an NPDES permit that specifies conditions the discharger must meet. The conditions are based on the established water quality objectives and the capacity of the existing storm water drainage system or receiving waters to assimilate the discharge. Discharge limitations are usually expressed as a combination of quantitative and procedural specifications. CWA provides for three types of NPDES permits: individual, group, and general. Issuance of waste discharge requirements must be noticed for public comment and approved at a hearing of the local authority (Ibid., p. 74). The primary industrial category in the regulation relevant to building and maintaining highways is “construction activities.” Construction activities, in this context, include clearing, grading, and excavating that result in the disturbance of 5 acres or more of land that is not part of a larger (nonhighway) construction project. Construction sites were targeted because studies showed that the runoff from construction sites has high potential for serious water quality impacts. Sediment runoff from construction sites may be 10 to 20 times that from agricultural lands. Non-point-source pollutants from construction sites include sediment, metals, oil and grease, nitrates, phosphates, and pesticides. To obtain an NPDES construction permit, a notice of intent must first be filed requesting permit coverage at least 48 hours before construction begins. The NOI contains the following information: 1. Owner of the site (legal name and address) and contact person’s name, title, and telephone number. This entity must have control over construction plans and specifications, the ability to make changes, and day-to-day operational control. 2. Construction site information—whether the construction is part of a larger project or the portion of the site that is impervious both before and after construction activities. Site location must be provided as latitude and longitude. Indicate whether endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitats are present, as well as whether the project is on Indian Country Lands.

29

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TABLE 1.10

Population Areas That Require Storm Water Permits A. Incorporated places with populations of 250,000 or more

State Alabama Arizona California Colorado District of Columbia Florida Georgia Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Virginia Washington Wisconsin

Incorporated place Birmingham Phoenix, Tucson Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose Denver

Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Atlanta Chicago Indianapolis Wichita Louisville New Orleans Baltimore Boston Detroit Minneapolis, St. Paul Kansas City, St. Louis Omaha Newark Albuquerque Buffalo, Bronx Borough, Brooklyn Borough, Manhattan Borough, Queens Borough, Staten Island Borough Charlotte Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Toledo Oklahoma City, Tulsa Portland Philadelphia, Pittsburgh Memphis, Nashville/Davidson Austin, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio Norfolk, Virginia Beach Seattle Milwaukee

B. Incorporated places with populations greater than 100,000 and less than 250,000 State Alabama Alaska Arizona

Incorporated place Huntsville, Mobile, Montgomery Anchorage Mesa, Tempe (Continued)

30

CHAPTER ONE

TABLE 1.10 State Arkansas California

Colorado Connecticut Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Massachusetts Michigan Mississippi Missouri Nebraska Nevada New Jersey New York North Carolina Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington Wisconsin

Population Areas That Require Storm Water Permits (Continued) Incorporated place Little Rock Anaheim, Bakersville, Berkeley, Chula Vista, Concord, El Monte, Escondido, Fremont, Fresno, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Glendale, Hayward, Huntington Beach, Inglewood, Irvine, Modesto, Moreno Valley, Oceanside, Ontario, Orange Aurora, Colorado Springs, Lakewood, Pueblo Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven, Stamford, Waterbury Fort Lauderdale, Hialeah, Hollywood, Orlando, St. Petersburg, Tallahassee Columbus, Macon, Savannah Boise City Peoria, Rockford Evansville, Fort Wayne, Gary, South Bend Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Des Moines Kansas City, Topeka Lexington-Fayette Baton Rouge, Shreveport Springfield, Worcester Ann Arbor, Flint, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Livonia, Sterling Heights, Warren Jackson Independence, Springfield Lincoln Las Vegas, Reno Elizabeth, Jersey City, Paterson Albany, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers Durham, Greensboro, Raleigh, Winston-Salem Akron, Dayton, Youngstown Eugene Allentown, Erie Providence Columbia Chattanooga, Knoxville Abilene, Amarillo, Arlington, Beaumont, Corpus Christi, Garland, Irving, Laredo, Lubbock, Mesquite, Pasadena, Plano, Waco Salt Lake City Alexandria, Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Portsmouth, Richmond, Roanoke Spokane, Tacoma Madison

C. Counties with unincorporated urbanized areas with population of 250,000 or more State California Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Maryland Texas Utah Virginia Washington

County Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Diego New Castle Dade De Kalb Honolulu Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Montgomery, Prince Georges Harris Salt Lake Fairfax King


31

Population Areas That Require Storm Water Permits (Continued) D. Counties with unincorporated urbanized areas with population greater than 100,000 and less than 250,000

State

County

Alabama Arizona California Colorado Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Nevada North Carolina Oregon South Carolina Virginia Washington Source:

Jefferson Pima Alameda, Contra Costa, Kern, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino Arapahoe Broward, Escambia, Hillsborough, Lee, Manatee, Orange, Palm Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota, Seminole Clayton, Cobb, Fulton, Gwinnett, Richmond Jefferson East Baton Rouge Parish, Jefferson Parish Howard Clark Cumberland Multnomah, Washington Greenville, Richland Arlington, Chesterfield, Henrico, Prince William Pierce, Snohomish

Adapted from Federal Register, vol. 55, no. 222, November 16, 1990, pp. 48073, 48074.

3. Scheduled beginning and ending dates of construction. 4. Identification of the receiving body of water, and storm water drainage information including a site map. 5. Type of construction activity: transportation should be indicated if the project is a roadway; utilities should be indicated for the installations of sewer, electric, and telephone systems. 6. Material handling and management practices indicating the type of material to be stored and handled on site and the management practices to be used to control storm water pollution. 7. Regulatory status of the site, including approval status of the erosion or sediment control plan. 8. Signature of the owner of the site certifying that the information is accurate. Most statewide NPDES permits for general construction activities require the permit holder to develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) using either best available technology economically achievable (BAT), best conventional technology (BCT), or best management practices (BMPs) to control pollutant discharge both during and after construction activities. Once prepared, the SWPPP will be maintained at the construction site by the highway department representative and made available on request by the local enforcement agency. All contractors and subcontractors working at the site are responsible for implementing the SWPPP. The SWPPP will generally include the following components: 1. Location, including a 1/4-mi vicinity map that shows nearby surface water bodies, drainage systems, wells, general topography, and location where storm water from the construction activities will be discharged, including MS4s. 2. A site map that indicates the total site area and total area to be disturbed. This map should indicate the location of the control practices to be implemented, areas where

32

3.

4. 5. 6.

7.

8. 9. 10. 11.

CHAPTER ONE

wastes and soils will be stored, drainage patterns for the site both before and after construction activity, areas of soil disturbance, areas of surface water, potential soil erosion areas, existing and planned paved areas, vehicle storage areas, areas of existing vegetation, and areas of postconstruction controls. A narrative description of the construction site, project, and activities. This should include a description of the fill material and native soils at the construction site and the percentage of site surface area that is impervious both before and after construction activities. A narrative description of toxic material used, treated, or disposed of at the construction site. Identification of potential sources of storm water pollution, and name of receiving water. Proposed controls and best management practices during construction, including description of • State and local erosion sediment control requirements • Source control practices intended to minimize contact between the construction equipment and materials and the storm water being discharged • Erosion and sediment control procedures to be implemented • Plan to eliminate or reduce discharge of other materials into the storm water Proposed postconstruction waste management and disposal activities and planned controls, including a description of state and local erosion and sediment postclosure control requirements. Estimated runoff coefficient for the site, estimated increase in impervious area following the construction, nature of fill, soil data, and quality of discharge. List of the contractors and their subcontractors who will be working at the construction site. Employee training. Maintenance, inspection, and repair activities.

Control measures for sediment include grading restrictions, runoff diversion, application of straw bales and filter fabric, revegetation requirements, and retention basins. Control measures for other pollutants include roof drains, infiltration trenches, grassy swales to detain storm water to allow sediments to settle out, oil/grit separators, detention basins, and proper management practices such as the proper application of fertilizers and pesticides. Another approach used to implement the NPDES program for state highway agencies is to issue comprehensive permits for all relevant highway construction, maintenance, and operations activities in areas meeting the population requirements outlined in 40 CFR 122.26. The benefit of a comprehensive permit is the management efficiency of administering the permit from both the regulatory agency and highway department perspectives. In California, for instance, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is responsible for issuing storm water discharge permits. The RWQCB in the San Francisco Bay area has issued a comprehensive NPDES permit for storm water discharged directly or through municipal storm drain systems to lakes, water supply reservoirs, groundwaters, the Pacific Ocean, San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, Suisun Bay, the Sacramento River Delta, or tributary streams or watercourses and contiguous water bodies in the San Francisco Bay region (District 4 and portions of District 10 of the California Department of Transportation, or Caltrans). Provisions of the permit cover maintenance operations and include requirements to submit plans for maintenance activities that affect storm water discharges and to improve


33

practices that will result in reduction of pollutants in discharges. Road sweeping plans, storm drains, catch basins, inlet and channel maintenance, and vegetation control plans are required. Caltrans must prepare storm water pollution prevention plans for maintenance facilities that cover such activities as vehicle and equipment maintenance, cleaning, fueling practices, and storage and handling of construction materials, fertilizers, pesticides, paints, solvents, and other chemicals. Under the provisions of the permit, Caltrans must rank construction activities on the basis of their potential impacts on receiving waters from pollutants in storm water discharges. Plans must be developed for erosion control, chemical and waste management, and postconstruction permanent features. Training is a key component of these plans. The permit also encompasses permanent control measures for the management of storm water draining from Caltrans rights-of-way in areas meeting the population criteria. Consideration must be given to high-risk areas where spills may occur and must include a plan to reduce the pollutants discharged into the system over time. This portion of the permit requires Caltrans to develop mechanisms to control illegal dumping, to respond to accidental discharges, and to identify and control procedures for discharge in a category not expressly prohibited by the permit. The RWQCB included specific provisions to assist in meeting water quality goals. For example, requirements of the permit include specific measures to reduce the mass load of copper in storm water discharges. Monitoring plans and annual reports are also required in the NPDES permit and are generally consistent with these provisions in standard construction and/or municipal storm water permits. Sustainable storm water management practices have been evolving over the last 20 years, but it has been only during the last decade that the movement has gained momentum and designers are looking toward best management practice and low impact design solutions to storm water issues. These design concepts use the natural capacity of the environment to detain, filter, and reduce (through evaporation and transpiration) the runoff from a roadway facility. Relying on these natural systems, rather than engineered water conveyance and discharge infrastructure, can • • • • •

Reduce regulatory burden and time in gaining approval for the project. Improve the function of treatment plant—reduce combine sewer outfills. Improve the environment—using design measures to create wetlands and other habitat. Gain community buy-in. Reduce costs.

Wetlands Involvement (Executive Order 11990). Under Executive Order 11990, the following procedures must be followed for any federal action that involves wetlands: • An opportunity for early public involvement must be provided for actions involving wetlands. For those actions requiring either a FONSI or an EIS, any notices for a public hearing, or an opportunity for a hearing, must indicate if any alternatives are located in wetlands. At any hearing, the location of wetlands must be identified. A newspaper notice inviting written comments must be published prior to issuance of a categorical exclusion. • Alternatives that would avoid wetlands must be considered, and if avoidance is not possible, measures to minimize harm to wetlands must be included in the action. Documentation of these avoidance requirements must be included in an EA or EIS. • A wetlands-only-practicable-alternative finding must be prepared for actions requiring a FONSI or an EIS (FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A).

34

CHAPTER ONE

Floodplain Involvement (Executive Order 11988). Executive Order 11988 require additional steps in the environmental review process for actions that encroach on floodplains. Specifically, the public must be given the opportunity for early review and comment, and notices must reference potential encroachments on the base floodplain. In addition, floodplain-only-practicable-alternative finding must be prepared for actions involving a significant encroachment (see FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8A). This finding must be included in the final environmental document. A floodplain evaluation must be prepared and summarized in the environmental document in accordance with federal regulation (23 CFR 650, Subpart A). This floodplain evaluation should contain a project description, including a map of the project showing the base floodplain and all project encroachments, as well as alternatives to encroachment. A discussion should be provided of the practicality of alternatives that would avoid longitudinal or significant encroachments. The floodplain evaluation should be summarized in the EA or EIS. The portions of the evaluation pertaining to fish and wildlife, vegetation, wetlands, growth inducement, etc., are to be included in the respective sections of the EA or EIS. Summaries involving floodplains in general, as well as hydraulics and risk, are to be included in a section entitled Floodplains. Safe Drinking Water Act. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was enacted in 1974 to protect the nation’s drinking water supply and protect public health through appropriate water treatment technologies. The SDWA applies to all of the more than 160,000 public water systems in the United States. SDWA establishes maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), or standards for the maximum safe levels of specific constituents in potable water. Important to highway engineers is the provision of SWDA that mandates protection of sources of drinking water. The SDWA requires the protection of drinking water and its sources: rivers, lakes, reservoirs, springs, and groundwater wells. The location of these resources, therefore, becomes an early consideration in the siteing and design phases of a project. Federal Endangered Species Act. The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC §§1531–1543) provides a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved. It also provides a program for the conservation of such endangered and threatened species. Section 7 of the act requires each federal agency, in consultation with the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, to ensure that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by a federal agency do not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such species unless such agency has been granted an exemption for such action. For federal highway projects, a request is made to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) regarding whether any species listed or proposed as endangered are present in the project area. If so, a biological assessment must be completed and reviewed by the FWS. The FWS will make a determination as to the impacts on critical habitat or on the species itself and whether the impacts can be mitigated or avoided. An exemption from the Endangered Species Act must be obtained where a project would result in impacts to endangered species. The level of involvement with the endangered species process can vary widely from project to project, but will generally involve the following steps: • Establish an area of potential environmental impact (APEI) and potential for conflict with endangered species. • Once preliminary alternatives are selected, determine whether a request for a species list from the FWS is required and then request a list, through FHWA, if required.


35

• Perform and document a biological assessment. • If there are no species present or there will be no effect, obtain FWS concurrence through FHWA before circulating the draft environmental document under NEPA. • If the preferred alternative affects species, request conference or consultation with the FWS through FHWA, which must be completed before the final environmental document under NEPA can be approved. Rivers and Harbors Act. The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC 401 et seq. RHA) was enacted to protect navigation and the navigable capacity of the nation’s waters. Two provisions of the act have to potential to significantly affect highway projects proposed in or around U.S. harbors or rivers are • Section 9 of the RHA, which requires a permit for the construction of bridges or causeways across navigable waters of the United States • Section 10 of the RHA, which requires a permit for various types of work performed in navigable waters, including stream channelization, excavation, and filling The permit jurisdiction is divided between two agencies. The Section 9 bridge permit is the responsibility of the USGS. Section 10 for construction activities performed in the water is within the jurisdiction of the USACOE. Although often issued together, this permit has independence from a permit issued under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 1.4.3 Federal Requirements Concerning Hazardous and Nonhazardous Waste Projects that include purchase of new right-of-way, excavation, or demolition or modification of existing structures should be evaluated to determine whether there is any known or potential hazardous waste within the proposed project limits. Where hazardous substances are involved, adequate protection must be provided to employees, workers, and the community prior to, during, and after construction. Typical materials that may constitute hazardous waste include pesticides, organic compounds, heavy metals, industrial waste, or other compounds injurious to human health and the environment. Assessment of the potential presence of hazardous materials is conducted in two stages referred to as phases I and II. Phase I investigations are based on documentary research and visual observation to identify concerns and evaluate the likelihood that hazardous substances have affected the property. Phase II includes the on-site collection of soil or water samples and completion of laboratory analysis to confirm that contamination is present. Phase I generally consists of historical research to evaluate current and past land uses and operations with a focus on what hazardous substances may have been introduced into the soil or water (including groundwater at the site); a search of regulatory records to evaluate whether the site or adjacent properties are listed in files as having violations, recorded hazardous substances releases or incidents, or a history of storing, handling, using, transporting, or disposing of hazardous substances; physical description of the soil geology and of surface water and groundwater, in order to evaluate the potential for migration of contaminants from the source to another property; and a site walk to observe the site conditions and operations as well as those of the neighboring properties. Phase II is a specifically designed sampling and analysis program that effectively addresses the concerns raised in the Phase I study. Phase II should be designed to collect sufficient data to establish that a valid concern exists and to indicate what level of remediation may be required to address the concern. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has developed a standard for completion of Phase I and Phase II investigations.

36

CHAPTER ONE

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act was enacted in 1974, and amended in 1984, to address growing concerns related to disposal of hazardous and nonhazardous waste. RCRA requires states to develop EPA-approved hazardous waste management plans and encourages options other than landfill disposal for final disposition of hazardous waste. A major objective of RCRA is to conserve and protect environmental resources, including the land resource that is lost to other uses when it is filled with solid waste. RCRA established • • • • •

A system for defining hazardous waste A method to determine whether hazardous waste has been generated Guidelines on how to store, handle, or treat hazardous waste Standards for proper disposal of waste Methods to track hazardous waste to its ultimate disposition

Resource recovery is an important area mandated by RCRA, and covers several materials used in highway construction, such as recycled glass, scrap tires, and recycled construction materials. Some hazardous materials can also be treated and recycled for use in highway construction. RCRA also covers issues of “use constituting disposal” for projects that seek to use embankments or road subbase as disposal areas for hazardous waste, if suitability can be demonstrated. Some of the research and demonstration projects in the area of resource recovery that are applicable to highways are discussed later in this chapter. Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The Toxic Substances Control Act sets the policy for testing suspected toxic substances to evaluate persistence in the environment and their effect on humans (acute toxicity levels and/or carcinogenic effects). TSCA also regulates toxic substances not regulated by RCRA such as asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), both of which may be found in existing highway facilities. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act was passed in 1980. It established national policy and procedures for identifying and remediating sites that are found to be contaminated with hazardous substances, and identified procedures for containing and removing releases of hazardous substances. CERCLA was amended and expanded by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). CERCLA established a hazard ranking system sites. The highest ranked sites have been placed on the National Priorities List (NPL) and are eligible for funding for environmental cleanup under CERCLA. CERCLA provides for “joint and several liability,” which means that any party identified as responsible for contamination of a site is considered equally responsible for cleanup costs with all other parties identified, and can be held 100 percent financially responsible in the event that other parties do not pay. Recovering costs from nonpaying parties is then the burden of the paying party and is pursued through the judicial system. Potentially responsible parties (PRPs) may be current or past owners and/or operators of a site where hazardous substances have been released, or persons who arranged for disposal or treatment of hazardous substances at the site. In addition, any person who knowingly accepted hazardous substances for transport to the site may be considered a PRP. Liability under CERCLA may also be retroactive to an era when the practices leading to the contamination were accepted industry standards. Petroleum is excluded from CERCLA unless mixed with other hazardous substances, in which case the entire mixture is considered hazardous. Provisions have been established under SARA for an Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund that will address petroleum releases.


37

A key concept mandated by CERCLA is “cradle-to-grave” responsibility for hazardous substances. Liability for a hazardous substance begins when it is accepted on the site or formulated at the site and continues after it is disposed off-site at a legally permitted facility. CERCLA is important to the highway planning process primarily in the acquisition of right-of-way. Accepting financial liability for contaminated property may affect the financial feasibility of a project. In addition, if significant cleanup must take place before highway construction can begin, substantial delays to the project may result. The presence of contaminated materials along the alignment of a proposed highway alignment may be a crucial element in determining whether it is viable route. Careful evaluation of the nature and extent of the contamination as well as the cleanup alternatives, costs, schedule, and ongoing liability is warranted on all sites within a planned right-of-way purchase. Title III of SARA established mandatory federal standards for community right-to-know programs, and for reporting toxic chemical release by manufacturers.

1.4.4 Federal Requirements Governing Use of Farmland Recreation Lands and the Coastal Zone Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA). The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 (73 USC §4201 et seq.) requires that a federal agency evaluate the effects a project may have on prime farmland before that agency can approve any action that may result in the conversion of farmland from agricultural use to nonagricultural use. The FFPA requires that before any federal action that would result in conversion of prime farmland is approved, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) must examine the effects of the action using criteria set forth in the FFPA. If it is determined that there are adverse effects, alternatives to lessen them must be considered. This process requires an inventory, description, and classification of affected farmlands be completed in consultation with the U.S. Soil Conservation Service within the USDA. The evaluation of land for agricultural use includes productivity, proximity to other land uses, impacts on remaining farmland after the conversion, and indirect or secondary effects of the project on agricultural and other local factors. Federal Coastal Zone Management Act. The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 USC §§1451–1464) requires states with coastlines to develop and implement federally approved coastal zone management programs (CZMPs). Once a state has an approved management program, federal projects or federally permitted development affecting the coastal zone must conform to the requirements of the state program “to the maximum extent practicable.” A determination of consistency with the approved CZMP is required from the state before federal approval can be granted. Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC §§1271–1287) provides that rivers and their immediate environment that meet specified criteria shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. A river placed in the Wild and Scenic River System may not be degraded in its wild and scenic value as a consequence of an action by a federal project or agency. Any proposed federal construction projects on the river or in its immediate environment must be brought before Congress with an explanation of how the river can maintain its wild and scenic recreation value despite the proposed construction activity. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC §§661–666) requires coordination and consultation among (1) the agency proposing the

38

CHAPTER ONE

highway project, (2) the FWS, and (3) the state agency responsible for protecting wildlife resources whenever the waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed to be impounded, diverted, or otherwise modified. Full consideration and evaluation of the costs and benefits on a resource and public welfare must be performed including proposed mitigation measures for potential impacts. Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. 16 USC 460-4 to -11, Public Law 88-578, protects public recreational land developed using federal funds under this act. Replacement lands converted to nonrecreational uses must be approved by the Secretary of the Department of the Interior.

1.4.5 Federal Requirements Protecting Significant Historical and Cultural Resources National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The purpose of the NHPA is to protect the historical and cultural foundations of the nation. The NHPA created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and provides for the review of federal projects that may affect a significant historic site. Section 106 of the NHPA requires all federal agencies to take into account the effects of their actions on significant historic properties. In the Section 106 process, a federal agency must identify affected historic properties, evaluate the effects of an action on such properties, and explore ways to avoid or mitigate those effects. The NHPA established a partnership with the states, as administered through State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) appointed by the governor of each state, to establish a statewide cultural resources preservation program tailored to state and local needs. The federal agency often conducts the Section 106 process with the ACHP, SHPOs, representatives of Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, and other interested parties. On large projects, a programmatic agreement (PA) or a memorandum of agreement (MOA) is often needed. A PA clarifies roles, responsibilities, and expectations of all parties engaged in federal projects that may have an effect on a historic property. An MOA specifies the mitigation measures that the lead federal agency must take to ensure the protection of a property’s historic values. While the NHPA is the principal federal law concerning the preservation of significant historic resources, there are other statutes that relate to various aspects of the federal historic preservation program. These range from the protection of archeological sites on federal lands, to the recognition of properties of traditional cultural or religious significance to Native Americans. These include • • • •

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (AHPA) Archeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA) American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (AIRFA) Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA)

The ACHP has established implementing regulations for the protection of historic properties (36 CFR 800). These procedures must be followed for federal undertakings. An undertaking is defined as any project, activity, or program that can result in changes in the character or use of historic properties, if any such historic properties are located in a defined area of potential effects (APE). Under these procedures, an opportunity for early public involvement must be provided for federal actions during the phase of the project development process. For categorically excluded projects, when properties eligible for inclusion on the National Register of


39

Historic Places are present or potentially present (such as in an archaeologically sensitive area), there must be early public involvement. Projects are excepted from this requirement if (1) they have been defined as having a minimal APE and therefore do not fall within the Section 106 definition of undertakings and (2) no known historic resources are present. Opportunity for involvement by the public generally occurs at the identification, evaluation, and consultation stages for projects categorically excluded from review under NEPA. For those actions requiring evaluation in an EA, notices concerning the initiation of the environmental review process or opportunities for public review must state whether any alternatives could potentially involve historic properties. If this uncertain then the notices must request the names of those persons who may have information relating to historic properties that may be affected or who may be interested in the effects of the undertaking on historic properties. At any hearing, the effects of any alternatives on such properties must be identified. For projects where an EA or EIS has been prepared, documentation of completion of the Section 106 process should be included in the completed document. For categorically excluded projects, Section 106 documentation is completed separately when resources have been identified.

1.4.6 Federal Requirements Protecting Disadvantaged and Minority Populations Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 2000d et seq.). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was arguably the most instrumental piece of legislation in providing an opportunity voice for minorities to participate in the review of federal capital programs. The Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in projects or programs receiving federal financial assistance. The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646). The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act provides benefits and protection for persons whose real property is acquired or who would be displaced from acquired property because of a project or program that receives federal funds. A displaced person may be an individual, family, business, farm, or nonprofit organization. Just compensation is required, and guidelines exist for ensuring fair treatment. Environmental Justice—Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations (February 11, 1994). Executive Order 12898 was issued to address disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental impacts on low-income and minority populations. The U.S. DOT issued DOT Order 5680.1 on April 15, 1997, to ensure that each modal agency within the DOT complies with this executive order. A number of state agencies have adopted analogous procedures requiring an evaluation of projects to determine whether they would result in a disproportionate adverse impact on minority or low-income populations.

1.5 LEAD-BASED PAINT REMOVAL A significant number of state-maintained steel bridges are coated with lead-based paint. Steel bridges were coated with lead-based paint for more than 40 years. The coating systems have an expected effective life of 15 to 25 years, and those on many bridges are now

40

CHAPTER ONE

deteriorating. Life extension and overall protection of the bridges from corrosion are dependent on refurbishing deteriorating coatings. The public has become increasingly aware that lead can represent a significant human health and environmental threat. When intact and in good condition, the paint does not pose a significant health risk. It is when paint is removed to prepare the surface for coating replacement, or as the paint deteriorates, that the risk of significant health risks escalates. Many highway structures are located in urban areas where lead-based paint removal has the potential to affect adjacent properties and to expose the public to hazardous concentrations of lead. Bridges are often constructed over water bodies where lead-containing dust from removal operations can affect water quality and the aquatic environment.

1.5.1 Biohazards of Lead A bioaccumulative substance such as lead can be stored in various organs and tissues of the body. As lead-containing tissues are consumed by larger organisms in the food chain, a cumulative effect occurs in each subsequent organism. For example, a fish in a lead-contaminated environment may be exposed to lead in the water and in the organisms that it eats, which have accumulated lead from their food source, and so on down the chain. Organisms at the top of the food chain are, therefore, exposed to higher concentrations of lead. In humans, long-term exposure can result in brain and nerve disorders, anemia, elevate blood pressure, reproductive problems, decreases in red blood cell formation, and slower reflexes. In high enough doses or after long-term bioaccumulation, lead exposure can cause death. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA’s) Interim Final Rule on Lead Exposure in Construction (29 CFR 1926.62) describes long-term overexposure effects of lead and provides uniform inspection and compliance guidance for lead exposure in construction. The primary methods of exposure to toxic levels of lead are through inhalation and ingestion. For example, paint removal workers may inhale leaded dust or, in the absence of proper cleaning and preventative measures, may ingest lead after it has settled on food, cigarettes, utensils, or other items placed in their mouths.

1.5.2 Regulatory Framework Hazardous waste is regulated under the RCRA if more than 220 lb (100 kg) of hazardous waste is generated each month, as is the case in most bridge paint removal projects. RCRA defines the concentrations of a waste that should be considered hazardous and establishes procedures for handling and disposing of hazardous waste. Disposing of waste is the responsibility of the waste generator. The lead-based paint and blasting grit recovered in bridge paint removal projects may contain concentrations of lead sufficient to classify it as hazardous, waste in all instances, the owner of the structure is considered the generator (in some states the contractor removing the paint may be considered a cogenerator). Subtitle C under RCRA is relevant to lead removal activities. Table 1.11 provides a listing of the pertinent RCRA regulations. Methods of testing wastes to determine whether the waste is hazardous are described in 40 CFR 261. Appendix II of that regulation describes the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP, Method 1311) that must be used to analyze for hazardous constituents such as lead. Leachable levels of various elements that will establish waste as hazardous are found in Table 1 of 40 CFR 261.24 and are presented in Table 1.11. Wastes with any of the characteristics listed in Table 1.12 would be considered hazardous. For example,

41


Pertinent Regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

RCRA regulation

Description of regulation

40 CFR 260 40 CFR 262 40 CFR 261 40 CFR 268 40 CFR 263

Hazardous waste management system Standards applicable to generators of hazardous waste Identification and listing of hazardous waste Land disposal restrictions (land ban) Standards applicable to transporters of hazardous waste

TABLE 1.12

RCRA Toxicity Characteristics and Waste Limits

RCRA waste number

Characteristic

D001 D002 D003 D004 D005 D006 D007 D008 D009 D010 D011

Ignitability Corrosivity Reactivity Arsenic toxicity Barium toxicity Cadmium toxicity Chromium toxicity Lead toxicity Mercury toxicity Selenium toxicity Silver toxicity

Waste limit, ppm* pH2; pH12.5 5.0 100.0 1.0 5.0 5.0 0.2 1.0 5.0

*Corrosivity is measured in pH units. Source: Based on Table 1 of 40 CFR 261.24.

using the TCLP testing method, if 5.0 mg/L or more of lead can be extracted from debris, the debris would be considered to be toxic and hazardous. EPA regulates the amount of hazardous substances and waste that can be released into the environment under both CERCLA and SARA. Under these requirements, an owner is required to contain lead-based paint removed from a structure. A response could be initiated at a paint removal project if improper containment of dust or debris results in a release of lead to the environment. A reportable quantity of released leaded waste is 10 lb (4.5 kg). The report must be made to the National Response Center [(800) 424-8802] and to state and local regulatory authorities within 24 hours. The calculations presented in Table 1.13 demonstrate how to estimate the unit area of paint on a bridge surface that would equate to a reportable CERCLA release of lead. CERLA and SARA regulations are found in 40 CPR 300 through 373. Discharges into the air and water area are also regulated by the CAA and CWA, respectively. EPA has mandated enforcement of regulations to the states, leading to nonuniformity in the procedures to be followed and the stringency of requirements. Permits for blasting are required in some states but not others. Because of the joint and several liability provision of CERCLA, it is possible that any one generator (or responsible party) may be liable for the entire waste disposal site cleanup. This is true even if there is no negligence on the part of the highway agency or its contractors. Regulatory agencies do not recognize contractual obligations among responsible parties and will seek financial compensation from whoever has funds and can be connected to the contamination. OSHA also has established several regulations applicable to worker protection during lead paint removal. These regulations are summarized in Table 1.14.

42

CHAPTER ONE

TABLE 1.13 Example Calculation of Surface Area Required to Generate a Unit Weight of Lead Assumptions: Lead in paint 1% (10,000 ppm) Dry film thickness (DFT) 10 mil (0.010 in) Density of dried paint 1.5 g/cm3 (can range from 1.1 to 2.5) Calculations: 1. Calculate volume of paint in 1 ft2 (1 ft2 929 cm2): Volume 929 cm2 (DFT 2.54 cm/in) 929 cm2 (0.010 in 2.54 cm/in) 23.60 cm3 2. Calculate weight of paint in 1 ft2: Paint weight density volume 1.5 g/cm3 23.60 cm3 35.4 g 3. Calculate weight of lead in 1 ft2 of paint (1 ppm 1 g/g): Lead weight ppm lead paint wt/ft2 10,000 g/g 35.4 g/ft2 354,000 g/ft2 4. Calculate square feet required to generate 1 lb of lead (1 lb 454 g 1,000,000 g/g 454,000,000 g/g): Area 1 lb ÷ wt of lead/ft2 454,000,000 g ÷ 354,000 g/ft2 1282 ft2 Source: Adapted from K. A. Trimbler, Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook, 2d ed., Steel Structures Painting Council/KTA-Tator, Inc., Pittsburgh, 1993.

TABLE 1.14 Regulations for Worker Protection during Paint Removal RCRA regulation

Description

29 CFR 1926 29 CFR 1926.33 29 CFR 1926.51 29 CFR 1926.59 29 CFR 1926.62 29 CFR 1926.63 29 CFR 1926.103

Safety of health regulations for construction Access to employee exposure and medical records Sanitation Hazard communication Lead Cadmium Respiratory protection

1.5.3 Approaches to the Management of Lead-Based Paint on Steel Bridges A number of methods have been advanced to effectively contain blasting debris and to minimize the amount of waste generated from the management of lead-based paint from steel bridges. These methods are discussed in Art. 1.5.5 of this chapter. They can be broadly characterized as follows. Deferring Maintenance. This approach does not serve to protect the bridge, and is the least satisfactory approach to protecting the large public investment represented by a major steel bridge.


43

Overcoating. This method consists of applying new layers of nonleaded paint over leadbased paint with the intent of extending the coating system for another 5 years or so. This method may reduce short-term costs and provide an agency more time while new innovations in lead paint removal are being developed. However, worker safety and environmental issues still remain with the structure until the lead-based paint is removed. For example, the volume of unleaded paint increases with each coat, and thus a greater quantity of lead-contaminated paint must be disposed of as hazardous waste in many cases. Additionally, performance of the overcoating products has been highly variable, depending on operator skill and experience, application conditions, existing paint that is being overcoated, and product consistency. Removal and Repainting. This strategy requires the use of abrasive blasting or other means to remove the existing lead-based paint, followed by application of a coating system. This would provide the most durable and effective protection for steel bridge structures. However, its cost-effectiveness is diminished due to the need to collect and dispose of the spent paint and blasting grit of as hazardous waste. Worker safety during removal is a significant consideration. Removing and Replacing Steel Members. This strategy involves removing members of the bridge during major rehabilitation efforts; removal of the lead-based paint within an enclosed workplace such as a fabricating shop; repainting, and restoring the members to their original location. Containment of the lead paint and blasting grit is more easily achieved with this approach. This method is generally cost-effective only on major rehabilitation projects.

1.5.4 Worker Protection during Removal of Lead-Based Paint Workers involved in removal, containment, and handling of lead-based paint must be protected against lead hazards. Blood poisoning has historically been a serious job hazard during bridge painting and likewise dangerous during the removal of lead-based paint. In addition, enclosing the work area to capture the blasting grit and waste paint creates a confined area for the workers, increasing the potential level of exposure and health risk. Guidance developed by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) included in its publication Lead in Construction identifies proper health and safety procedures to be observed by painting contractors. The procedures generally require training of employees, enclosure of the work area, decontamination of workers, the use of personal protection and monitoring equipment, and decontamination of personnel and equipment when leaving the work space. Unconfined removal of paint regardless of lead content presents environmental, health, and safety concerns. It has the potential to result in unacceptable deposition of dust and debris in roadways, streams, and communities, as well as presenting a hazard to workers.

1.5.5 Removal Methods and Containment K. A. Trimbler has described and compared methods of lead paint removal. His findings are summarized in Table 1.15 and described below. (K. A. Trimbler, Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook, 2d ed., Steel Structures Painting Council/KTA-Tator, Inc., Pittsburgh, 1993, and personal communication, August 2002.)

44

1 1

Method 2. Open abrasive blast cleaning with recyclable abrasives

Method 3. Closed abrasive blast cleaning with vacuum

1 1 5

Method 7. Ultrahigh-pressure water jetting

Method 8. Ultrahigh-pressure water jetting with abrasive injection

Method 9. 4 3

Power-tool cleaning

Method 11. Power-tool cleaning with vacuum attachment

Hand-tool cleaning

2

Method 6. High-pressure water jetting with abrasive injection

Method 10.

2

High-pressure water

Method 5. jetting

Method 4. Wet abrasive blast cleaning

2–3 f

5

2–4 f

Method 1. Open abrasive blast cleaning with expendable abrasives

2–3

2–3

1–2

5

4–5

5

3–4

5

5

5

Flat

Method and name

2

2

1–2

4–5

3–4

4–5

2–3

5

3–4

5

5

Irregular

1–2

1–2

1

5

1

5

1

5

5

5

5

Flat

1–2

1–2

1

4–5

1

4–5

1

5

3–4

5

5

Irregular

Rust/mill scale removalb

Quality of preparation Paint removalb

Equipment investmenta

TABLE 1.15 Comparison of Paint Removal Methods

1–3

1–3

1–3

4–5

3–5

4–5

3–5

4–5

5

5

5

Quality for paintingc

4–5

3–4

4–5

5

5

5

5

4–5

4–5

3

1

Dust generationd

4

4

4

2–3

2–4

2–3

2–4

1

4

4

1

4–5

4

4

2–4

2–4

2–4

2–4

2–3

4

1

1–2

2

2

2

4

4

3–4

3

4

2

5

5

Volume Containment Production of debrisd requiredd ratee

Debris created

45

Sponge jetting

Carbon dioxide blast

Laser paint removalg

3–4

1

1

2–4

1

2–3

2–3

3–4

3–4

5

2–3

3

5

3–4

4–5

4–5

1–2

2–4

5

2–3

2–3

5

3

2–3

2–3

1

1–2

4–5

1

2–3

2–3

3–4

3–4

5

2–5

4–5

4–5

4–5

4–5

4

5

4–5

3

4

2–4

3–4

2–3

4

4

1

1

5

1

1

5

2–5

2–5

5

4–5

4–5

1

5

4

1

Ratings dependent upon combinations of methods used.

1

1–2

4–5

1

4–5

4–5

3–4

3–4

1–2

4

2–4

3–4

3–4

4–5

3–4

1

1

4–5

1–2

2–3

2–3

1

1–2

1–2

b

5, very inexpensive; 4, inexpensive; 3, moderately expensive; 2, expensive; 1, very expensive. 5, highly effective; 4, effective; 3, moderately effective; 2, poor; 1, very poor (ineffective). c 5, excellent; 4, good; 3, marginal; 2, poor; 1, very poor. d 5, no/none; 4, little/low; 3, moderate; 2, sizable; 1, substantial. e 5, very high; 4, high; 3, moderate; 2, low; 1, very low. f Most contractors already own much of this equipment. Therefore, even though the purchase price is high, little additional investment may be needed. g Additional methods supplied by K. A. Trimbler, 2002, with ratings for these specific methods developed based on general experience. Source: From K. A. Trimbler, Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook, 2d ed., Steel Structures Painting Council/KTA-Tator, Inc., Pittsburgh, 1993, with permission, and personal communication, 2002.

a

Method 21.

Method 20. Thermal spray vitrificationg

Method 19. Abrasive blasting with proprietary additive for lead stabilizationg

Method 18. Combinations of removal methods

Method 17. cleaning

Method 16. Sodium bicarbonate blast cleaning

Chemical stripping

Method 15.

3

Method 13. Power-tool cleaning to bare metal with vacuum attachment

Method 14.

4

Method 12. Power-tool cleaning to bare metal

46

CHAPTER ONE

Open Abrasive Blast Cleaning with Expendable Abrasives. In this method, compressed air propels blasting grit against the coated surface. The spent blasting grit is then collected for disposal. The major advantages of this method are that contractors are familiar with this long-practiced method, it is very effective in creating a superior surface preparation, it reaches areas otherwise difficult to access, and it is relatively quick (seperate containment considerations). The major disadvantage of this method is that it creates a high level of leaded dust and large quantities of debris that typically must be disposed of as hazardous waste. The additional containment requirements, hygiene training, and personal protection equipment requirements increase the cost of removal. Open Abrasive Blast Cleaning with Recyclable Abrasives. In this method, metallic abrasives are used to remove the paint. The abrasives can be separated from the debris (paint, rust, mill scale) and reused. The volume of dust and debris is reduced as compared to open abrasive blast cleaning with expendable abrasives, but the effectiveness and the ability to reach inaccessible areas are the same. Additional disadvantages are contractors’ unfamiliarity with the method and the special care that must be taken to keep the blasting grit moisture-free to avoid rusting and clumping. Should the abrasive dust escape containment, it may cause rust spots on the surfaces where it settles. Because the grit is recycled, higher concentrations of airborne lead dust within the containment area will have to be considered for worker safety. Closed Abrasive Blast Cleaning with Vacuum. A third method is to apply a compressed-air propellant from a nozzle fitted with a localized containment assembly that employs a vacuum. The recycled metallic grit, dust, and debris are vacuumed as the surface is blasted. This method is rated as highly effective, both in surface preparation and in containment of dust and debris, but the rate of cleaning is slow. The greatest limitation of this method is that the containment mask must be held tightly to the surface of the structure, reducing the method’s effectiveness on irregular and inaccessible surfaces. The containment method confines the blast spray pattern so that only small surface areas are being blasted at any one time. This requirement, along with the need to maintain a tight seal, is arduous and leads to operator fatigue. Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning. In the wet abrasive method, water is injected into a stream of slag abrasive propelled by compressed air. This method is effective both in dust control and in the quality of surface preparation; however, the amount of waste produced is substantial and difficult to clean up. Inhalation hazard is greatly reduced with this method, but the potential for ingestion still exists. High-Pressure Water Jetting. High pressure water (20,000 lb/in2 or 138 MPa) propelled against the surface is effective without the use of grit. This method reduces dust to negligible levels; however, the potential for ingestion still exists. The water is voluminous and difficult to capture in containment. The method is not effective in removing paint from relatively inaccessible areas or in removing mill scale. A rust inhibitor is usually used as part of this method, which may affect the applied coating. High-Pressure Water Jetting with Abrasive Injection. Combining the previous method with abrasive injection results in all the advantages and disadvantages of the previous methods but with the additional complication of having grit in the disposal water. It is considered highly effective in removing mill scale and paint from inaccessible areas. Ultrahigh-Pressure Water Jetting. Even more highly pressurized water (up to 40,000 lb/in2 or 276 MPa) can be propelled against the surface without the use of grit. This method is more efficient in removing paint than the high-pressure water jetting method; however, the main advantages and disadvantages of the high-pressure water jetting method still apply.


47

Ultrahigh-Pressure Water Jetting with Abrasive Injection. The ultrahigh-pressure water jet method can be enhanced by the addition of disposable abrasives to the jet stream. The result is rated highly effective, with advantages and disadvantages similar to those of the previously described water jetting methods. Hand-Tool Cleaning. Manually operated impact tools and scrapers can be used to remove paint and mill scale. This method is relatively inexpensive, but is relatively ineffective compared to other methods. Since only small amounts of localized dust and debris are created, workers may have a false sense of security about exposure, thus making it difficult to enforce personal protective equipment requirements. Power-Tool Cleaning. Power tools such as chippers, needle guns, descalers, wire brushes, sanding disks, and grinding wheels can be used to remove paint, rust, and scale from the bridge surface. This is a labor-intensive method. The resulting quality of preparation of the surface may be inadequate, depending on the condition of the coating being removed. Airborne dust is generated, and workers must be properly protected. Power-Tool Cleaning with Vacuum Attachment. In another version of the previous method, a vacuum attachment is added around power tools and debris. This has the disadvantage that accessibility in tight areas is reduced because of the shroud and vacuum attachment. On irregular surfaces, a seal may be difficult to maintain, and airborne leaded dust may be present. Because a seal typically minimizes dust, workers may not be aware when it has slipped and they thus require additional respiratory protection. Power-Tool Cleaning to Bare Metal. Power tools can also be used to clean to the bare metal. This method adds such tools as scarifiers (rotary peening tools) to the power-tool set and can achieve a generally higher level of surface preparation. More dust is created, and higher levels of worker protection and training are required. Productivity is low, and a high quality of surface preparation may not be achieved in inaccessible or heavily pitted areas. Power-Tool Cleaning to Bare Metal with Vacuum Attachment. A modification of the previous method contains dust and debris using a shroud and a vacuum attachment around the scarifying power tools, creating a seal with the bridge surface. This has the same disadvantages as the method of power-tool cleaning with vacuum attachment, but with additional training required on the equipment and greater cost to achieve bare-metal standards. Chemical Stripping. Chemical stripping agents can be applied to the surface, left in place for several hours, and then scraped off along with paint, rust, and scale. The surface must then be flushed with water and the chemical agent neutralized. The rinse material must be contained and disposed of properly. This method virtually eliminates airborne debris. Personal protective clothing must be worn during the removal process to prevent dermal contact with leaded debris. However, not all chemicals are effective on all paints, and few will remove all the rust and scale. Sponge Jetting. In the sponge jetting method, compressed air is used to propel polyurethane particles (sponge) that may be seeded with abrasives against the bridge surface. The debris and sponges are collected and sorted. The sponges can then be reused. The quality of surface preparation is similar to that from other blast cleaning methods, but the productivity is lower. The amount of debris is significantly reduced because of the recycling of the sponges. Visible dust is reduced, although containment and personal protection gear must be maintained as in other blasting methods. Costs of the equipment and abrasives are high.

48

CHAPTER ONE

Sodium Bicarbonate Blast Cleaning. Either jetted water or compressed air can be used to propel water-soluble sodium bicarbonate against the bridge surface. This method does not remove mill scale or rust effectively. Dust is significantly reduced when jetted with water, thereby reducing the potential for lead inhalation, but lead ingestion remains a hazard. Containment of the water is difficult. It may be demonstrated on a case-by-case basis that the sodium bicarbonate serves to stabilize lead in the paint so that it does not leach into the water in concentrations great enough to render the blasting water a hazardous waste. There is no grit waste. This method requires inhibitors to prevent flash rust from forming when the paint is removed. Carbon Dioxide Blast Cleaning. Small pellets of dry ice can be propelled using compressed air against the bridge surface. This method does not remove mill scale or heavy rust, and production is slow. This method reduces the volume of waste to only the actual paint being removed. It also greatly reduces sparking risk, and dust is reduced. Worker exposure is reduced, though it must still be controlled. The equipment and materials for this method are relatively expensive. Combinations of Removal Methods. Combining methods, if done effectively, may reduce the volume of waste or increase productivity or the quality of surface preparation. The objective is to select methods that are complementary. An example would be first using a chemical stripper, which yields low dust and minimizes the need for containment. The chemicals will remove the leaded paint but not the mill scale. Once the hazardous substances are removed, another method, such as wet blasting, can remove the mill scale and rust without necessitating further hazardous waste disposal. Abrasive Blasting with Proprietary Additive for Lead Stabilization. The equipment and procedures used are identical to open abrasive blasting, except that the abrasive is preblended with a proprietary material that stabilizes the lead, typically creating a nonhazardous waste for disposal. Thermal Spray Vitrification. This method involves the application of molten glass to the surface that binds with the coating. Upon cooling, the glass/paint composite cracks, and spontaneously disbonds from the surface. Laser Paint Removal. This method involves the use of lasers to instantaneously vaporize the paint, turning it into an ash that is vacuumed for disposal. 1.5.6 Containment Considerations Design of proper containment requires the participation of specialists in structural engineering, coatings, ventilation, and exhaust. The following considerations should be addressed in the development of a containment system: • The environmental media (air, water, soil) that are vulnerable and the containment methods that will provide the best protection • Durability • Compatibility with the selected removal method, and potential for interference with the productive removal of the paint, mill scale, and rust and the application of a new coat of paint • Ease of construction, disassembly, and moving from one area of the structure to another • Local climate conditions • Continued usability of the structure and proximity of nearby structures and people


49

• Cost-effectiveness • Compliance with applicable regulations Materials used to construct containments include rigid panels or flexible materials such as tarpaulins. The selected materials should be fire-retardant, given the sparking hazard, high dust, and high ventilation aspects of the procedure. The checklist provided in Table 1.16 may be followed in designing an appropriate containment system. Various debris-recovery assessment methods are underdevelopment. Some, such as air monitoring and analysis of soil and water samples to evaluate whether TABLE 1.16 Containment Design Checklist 1. Review drawings and specifications for project familiarity. 2. Investigate OSHA and EPA regulations affecting worker protection and control over emissions. 3. Determine method of surface preparation to be employed. 4. Examine the structure to be prepared: • Confirm that the selected method of preparation is suitable. • Determine if any coats of paint will be applied in containment. • Assess the load-bearing capacity of the structure to support containment. • Examine the structure for attachment points for the containment. • Divide large structures into logical containment units according to size and configuration. Consider the air movement requirements and the need to have a large enough area for productive surface preparation and painting. • Determine if a working platform should be used on elevated projects. Determine how far ground covers should extend beneath or around the removal operation. • When working over water, determine if a barge is going to be used for spent abrasive collection or staging, and assess the need for water booms to minimize problems due to inadvertent spills. Determine the need for U.S. Coast Guard approval and navigation restrictions. • Determine methods for conveying the debris for recycling or disposal. 5. Determine project-specific ventilation requirements. • Consult Industrial Ventilation: A Manual of Recommended Practice (Committee on Industrial Ventilation, American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists, Cincinnati; 20th ed., 1988) for engineering guidance. • Select the air velocity (air speed) throughout the work area and exhaust volume required. • Determine the necessary transport velocity through the exhaust ductwork required to avoid dropout of debris. • Lay out the ductwork as short as practical with as few bends as possible. Do not use bends with a centerline radius less than 2 times the duct diameter. Include the use of exhaust hoods or plenums within containment. • Select the air-cleaning device (dust collector) on the basis of the volume of air and dust loading of the airstream (air-to-cloth ratio). • Select the fan that will provide an adequate volume of air, and that is able to overcome the resistance throughout the system. • Provide adequate makeup air (supply air), properly distributed to provide a uniform airflow. Include properly balanced forced air if required. • Confirm that all of the above will provide ample airflow throughout the work area. If not, consider the use of localized ventilation and exhaust. 6. Obtain and review equipment manufacturers’ technical information. 7. Complete the design package. Utilize the expertise of structural and mechanical engineers, industrial hygienists, coatings specialists, and equipment specialists. Source: From K. A. Trimbler, Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook, 2d ed., Steel Structures Painting Council/KTA-Tator, Inc., Pittsburgh, 1993, with permission.

50

CHAPTER ONE

lead content has increased as a result of paint removal activities, have been codified in regulations. A method for calculating debris recovery that has been used by the South Carolina Department of Transportation is found in the Struchual Steel Painting Council (SSPC) Guide 61, Guide for Containing Debris Generated during Paint Removal Operations (SSPC 92-07, March 1992). The following equation is used in the SSPC guideline for estimating debris recovery: RE

Wd × 100 Wa + Wp

where RE efficiency of recovery Wd dry weight of abrasive and paint debris collected Wa dry weight of abrasive used Wp calculated weight of paint to be removed This estimation procedure has the limitation of not incorporating the weight of the various release media (air, soil, water), which influence the effectiveness of a containment. A 1 percent debris loss into the soil is not as significant as a 1 percent debris loss into the air. Care must be taken when using this method to measure only the abrasive and paint from the project and not to measure soil that may have come into contact with the debris. The project designer should incorporate an environmental monitoring plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the containment methods. Reporting and record keeping within the plan should include the following data: • • • • • • • • •

Name and location of the site, along with a site plot plan Identification of the individual or company that is conducting the monitoring Name and qualifications of the analytical laboratory used Criteria and rationale for selecting monitoring and sampling sites and duration of sampling Descriptions of sampling and monitoring methods Quality assurance and quality control plans Examples of reporting forms Acceptance criteria Reporting procedures and corrective actions if acceptance criteria are not met

1.5.7 Community Relations Bridges are public structures. Lead poisoning caused by lead-based paint has come to the forefront of public awareness. Any inconvenience to the public due to bridge maintenance calls attention to the structure and ongoing operations. If not handled well, leadbased paint removal from bridges can become a volatile community issue. Some states have passed regulations requiring public notice. The highway agency should be prepared to provide complete, accurate, and current documentation on the safety procedures that are implemented to protect the public health and the environment. Gaining regulatory agreement with the removal and containment methods will also be valuable in reducing public concern. Adjusting the timing for paint removal activities to be conducted during off-peak hours also serves to diminish the attention that the operation receives.


51

1.5.8 Specifications Guidelines Specifications for scraping or blasting lead-based paint from structures should be written with worker safety and environmental issues in mind, so that qualified contractors who can adhere to a high level of quality and compliance are selected for the project. These specifications should • Describe the extent of surface preparation and the degree of containment required and let the contractor propose how to accomplish this. • Identify key health and safety and environmental regulations to ensure that the contractor is aware of these regulations and plans compliance strategies in the bid. • Clearly state that the paint to be removed is lead based. The highway department should have had the paint tested prior to contract bid if there is any doubt whether the paint is lead based. The cost differential is too great to make the assumption or let a contract with the lead concentration factor as an unknown. • Specify how the waste is to be treated, tested, handled, and disposed of. • Identify the worker protection standards and requirements that the contractor’s health and safety plan must meet at a minimum.

1.5.9 Management of Industrial Lead-Based Paint Removal Projects The following steps have been developed for managing lead-based paint removal projects based on procedures in Trimbler’s Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook. Initial Project Evaluation. In the initial project evaluation, the owner or specifier must determine whether the coating contains lead-based paint either by reviewing earlier plans and specifications for the structure or by sampling and analysis. Prebid Assessment of Paint Removal Methods and Debris Generated. The owner or specifiers should estimate how much waste will be generated by methods evaluated to be appropriate to the size and circumstances of the project. Designing a testing program to evaluate the toxicity of waste generated may be appropriate for large paint removal projects. Understanding the Regulations before Preparing the Specifications. The regulations regarding air quality, water quality, soil cleanup, unauthorized releases, worker protection, and hazardous waste generators should be thoroughly understood. How these regulations are enforced should be discussed with both state and local officials. Preparing the Project Specifications. Both painting and lead removal requirements should be addressed in the specifications. These should identify the methods for surface preparation and the coating system to be applied. The relevant regulations, the degree of containment, and the evaluation of performance criteria should all be specified. Developing a Worker Protection Plan. Prior to start-up, the contractor should provide a worker safety plan that addresses exposure monitoring, the compliance program, the respiratory protection program, personal protective equipment, housekeeping issues, hygiene facilities and procedures, medical surveillance, employee removal for exposure

52

CHAPTER ONE

to lead, employee training, signage, record keeping, and employees’ right to observe and review monitoring information. Preparing Environmental Protection Monitoring Plans. The procedures developed to verify environmental protection should include high-volume air samplers, tests for visible air emissions (opacity), personal air quality monitors, measurement (and reporting requirements) of unauthorized releases, and pre- and postproject soil quality and water quality sampling. Developing Procedures for the Control and Handling of Hazardous Waste. Assuming that hazardous waste is to be generated, plans should be developed for identifying the waste, obtaining a hazardous waste generator identification number from the EPA, preparing for proper notification and certifications with each shipment, preparing waste manifests, packaging and labeling waste, implementing contingency plans, conducting waste treatment and analysis for on-site handling, and record keeping. Designing a Containment and Ventilation Plan. The contractor should develop detailed plans to select appropriate support structures and containment, address ventilation and other worker safety issues, provide emissions control, achieve water and soil protection and debris recovery, and verify the integrity of the containment structure. Monitoring the Project. The project manager should develop a plan to monitor the adequacy of all of the control measures; visually monitor the project regularly and use approved testing methods to evaluate adequacy of controls; regularly monitor the ventilation system and the integrity of the containment; regularly examine waste storage facilities, and the handling and transportation methods and procedures; and verify worker protection and hygiene procedures. OSHA standards must be observed. Figure 1.2 illustrates a decision tree to aid in the management of lead paint removal.

1.6 RESOURCE RECOVERY AND USE OF WASTE MATERIAL Given the vast amount of building materials required to construct and maintain the transportation infrastructure in the United States, the country’s highway system represents a tremendous opportunity for the beneficial use of reclaimed and recycled resources. However, the reclamation and reuse of waste material must be done in an environmentally responsible manner. The handling, disposal, and reuse of solid waste is regulated by a number of environmental statutes. Increased cost of complying with these requirements has increased the appeal of recycling and resource management. Because solid waste material is not as uniform as raw materials, the characteristics, performance, cost of preparing, and application of solid waste vary with the source and type of the material. Results in highway applications vary considerably and depend on such parameters as climate, composition, material handling practices, and construction procedures. Factors to be considered when recycling a waste to a highway construction end use include the following [National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Transportation Research Board, Synthesis 199, Recycling and Use of Waste Materials and By-Products in Highway Construction: A Synthesis of Highway Practice, Washington D.C., 1994]: Environmental Threats and Benefits. Along with the considerable environmental benefit of reducing the landfill burden, potential threats to the environment caused by the use of

53


PHASE 2

PHASE 1 Determine the Presence of Lead

Lead Present

No Lead

PHASE 3

Assess Risks to Conduct Coating Spot Repair Other Assessment to Remove/Replace Personnel, Public Determine Painting Demolish Environment Strategy

No Painting Not Feasible

End of Lead Considerations

PHASE 5

PHASE 6 Select Environmental Monitoring Strategy

Feasible

Select Removal/Containment To Achieve Required Emission Control Level Consistent with Maintenance Strategy

PHASE 4 Establish Site-Specific Limitations on Emissions

PHASE 7

PHASE 8

PHASE 9

Establish Worker Lead Protection Requirements

Establish Waste Handling Requirements

Establish Project Clearance Criteria

PHASE 11

PHASE 10

Prepare Project Specifications

Prepare Project Cost Estimate

Acceptable

Unacceptable

Return to Phase 2

FIGURE 1.2 Decision chart for management of lead paint removal. (From K. A. Trimbler, Industrial Lead Paint Removal Handbook, 2d ed., Steel Structures Painting Council/KTA-Tator, Inc., Pittsburgh, 1993, with permission)

recycled material must be considered and compensated, mitigated, or otherwise overcome before use of recycled material is feasible. Regulatory Requirements, Guidelines, and Restrictions. The federal and state legislation and guidance regarding recycled materials reflect reduced landfill capacity in the United States and the recognition that there is a net benefit to producing resources from

54

CHAPTER ONE

waste. The federal government as well as some states now have recycling mandates in place. Permits are often required when conducting recycling activities, and/or when creating an authorized disposal site in using certain wastes as embankment fill. If the recycling activity falls under the RCRA classification of “use constituting disposal,” additional regulations apply. Economic Cost and Benefit. Economic considerations are often the driving force behind recycling efforts on the county and city level, because of the increased landfilI costs and increasingly limited capacity. Recycling for highway departments may become more attractive as budget cuts increase and the price for recycled waste materials decreases. In some cases, recycled materials extend the service life of highway components, making the life-cycle costs of using such materials attractive. Engineering Properties and Technical Performance. Because of the variability of the composition of waste materials, performance results for end products may vary significantly, requiring careful evaluation before identifying suitable applications for their use. The primary question is “does the performance of the material compare favorably with the same material constituted from raw materials?” In some instances, the use of waste material has consistently improved performance. For instance, silica fume use in portland cement results in higher compressive strength and higher resistance to corrosion of steel reinforcement due to the increased density and reduced porosity of the resulting concrete. (“Silicon,” Minerals Yearbook, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C., 1989.) Construction Materials Shortages and Alternative Resource Availability. Millions of tons of aggregate are used each year in the construction of highways. Resources from existing quarry mining are being depleted and the new sources are often not used because of restrictive regulation and preferred uses of the land. In areas experiencing shortages, recycling construction materials, waste minerals, and other products into aggregate is more cost-effective than shipping aggregate from distant quarries. Steel is one of the most widely recycled materials used in highways. Steel reinforcement can be composed completely of recycled scrap steel, and steel girders can contain as much as 25 percent recycled scrap steel. Recycling scrap steel greatly reduces reliance on foreign sources for raw materials in the steel industry. (NCHRP Synthesis 199, p. 6.) 1.6.1 Legislation Affecting Use of Recycled Material The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). RCRA classified solid waste management facilities and practices, required states to develop comprehensive state plans for solid waste management (Dufour, op. cit., p. 99). RCRA also emphasized the growing landfill capacity problem and the need to develop approaches to handling wastes. In the preamble of RCRA, attention was called to the vast quantity of recoverable materials that are placed in landfills and to the fact that the recovery or conservation of many of these materials would benefit the United States by reducing projected landfill capacity requirements, retaining and expanding our national resources, and reducing the country’s dependence on foreign resources. In reference to recycled materials, Section 6002 of RCRA requires that federal, state, and local agencies receiving funds from the federal government must procure supplies and other items composed of the highest practical percentage of recovered or recycled materials, consistent with maintaining satisfactory levels of • Product quality • Technical performance


55

• Price competition • Availability Also, under RCRA, specifications cannot be written to discriminate against materials with recycled constituents. In addition, EPA was authorized to prepare guidelines for recycling, and resource recovery guidelines addressing procurement practices and information on research findings about the uses and availability of recycled materials. Guidelines covering coal fly ash in portland cement, recycled paper, retreaded tires, building insulation, and rerefined oil have been developed. While not specifically required by EPA, the guidelines encouraged most state highway programs to prepare specifications allowing the substitution of fly ash in concrete. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). ISTEA authorized DOT to coordinate with EPA and state programs in developing information on the economic savings, technical performance qualities, and environmental and public health threats and benefits of using recoverable resources in highway construction. TEA-21 provided technical corrections to ISTEA. ISTEA specifically calls out requirements for the percentage of asphalt pavement containing recycled rubber from scrap tires. In addition, state legislation has been developing to promote both research into the performance and viability of recycled materials and the procurement of such materials. Many have established mandatory recycling laws and most have used wastes or waste byproducts in their highway programs.

1.6.2 Waste Material Generated Waste material can be categorized as construction wastes, industrial wastes, mining or mineral wastes, agricultural wastes, or domestic wastes (of which scrap tires are a significant subset). Many advanced recycling programs have been established to make use of these wastes, such as requiring identifying codes for the base resin in plastic products to enable more refined recycling of plastics. Some of these wastes are not suitable for or do not make a significant recycling contribution to highway use. For example, only a small amount of the total crop waste (estimated to be about 9 percent of all the total nonhazardous solid waste generated each year in the United States) has a beneficial highway use. Potential uses are as an asphalt extender or portland cement additive. In another example, it has been shown that wastes can be rendered essentially benign when used in asphaltic concrete installations. In a demonstration to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the toxicity of bottom ash from a municipal sewage sludge incinerator was shown to be less than or equal to the toxicity of the asphaltic concrete matrix to which it was attached (Request for Approval of WIA in MnDOT Asphaltic Concrete Non-Wear Course Projects, Final report, S. David, Jan 16, 2002). The following articles contain brief descriptions of the types of wastes that research has indicated have the potential for use in highway projects (NCHRP Synthesis 199).

1.6.3 Construction Waste Much construction demolition debris consists of wastes with little recycling value for highways, such as wood and plaster. However, demolition debris also includes concrete, glass, metal, brick, and asphalt, most of which can be reused in highways as aggregate. In order to be a viable resource and meet the standard specifications as aggregate when crushed, the construction and/or demolition rubble must be separated from the other debris and cleaned

56

CHAPTER ONE

of detritus. Construction wastes generated and the associated annual tonnage produced are presented below. Tonnage estimates were collected from numerous sources and summarized in NCHRP Synthesis 199. Reclaimed Asphalt. Asphalt pavement from the demolition of parking lots, roads, and highways can be reclaimed. Most states are making at least some use of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) in highways, with use within asphalt pavement as the most prevalent use. Estimated tonnage of available RAP is 50 million tons annually. Because the use of RAP interferes with the ability to control hot-mix temperatures during formulation, asphalt mixtures can contain only between 20 and 50 percent RAP. Achieving 50 percent RAP content is practical only in a laboratory setting, where thorough blending of the RAP and new aggregate can be controlled. When plant efficiency is a concern, 50 percent RAP in hot mix is not practical. The differential between the temperature of the discharged gases and the discharged asphalt mix reaches 70F (21C). High exhaust gas temperatures can lead to premature corrosion of plan equipment. Thus the percentage of RAP that can be incorporated efficiently is based on the plant efficiency that can be maintained. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hot-Mix Asphalt Paving Handbook, AC 150/5370-14, July 1991, Appendix 1, pp. 1–21, and 2–45.) Reclaimed Concrete Pavement (RCP). The recycling of concrete pavement began in this country many years ago, first as unbound aggregate, then in asphalt-wearing surfaces, and later as concrete aggregate. Improved methods of breaking up concrete and separating out the rebar have made the use of RCP more cost-competitive. Many states now recycle concrete pavements either as new concrete or as aggregate in subbase material or base course. This does not include demolition debris of concrete structures. Roofing Shingles. Scrap and leftover materials from composite shingle manufacturing operations results in a large quantity of waste annually. The waste includes fragments, asphalt binder, and granules. These wastes can be recycled as asphalt paving material. Shingle waste from roofing contractors and demolition operations is less viable because of possible contamination. Sandblasting Residue. Many uses of sandblasting grit are possible if the removed paint was not lead based. If the paint was lead based or contained other metals, the debris would have to be analyzed to determine if it was nonhazardous before suitable use. Demolition Debris. Demolition debris is a major component of waste. Much of this debris can not be received in municipal landfills. To be viable for recycling, the debris has to be separated into homogeneous materials. Rubble material has many recycling uses in highways. Wood debris can be chipped and used for lightweight fill and mulch, but only if it is untreated. Disposing of asbestos-containing material (ACM, prevalent in buildings constructed before 1979) is difficult because chrysotile asbestos fibers are known to increase cancer risk if inhaled. If demolition of buildings with ACM from state transportation right-of-way is required in a project, it is possible in some states to arrange for on-site disposal in a state-monitored landfill.

1.6.4 Industrial Waste Approximately 150 million tons (136 109 kg) of industrial waste of the type that can be potentially reused to some degree in highway projects is produced annually in the United States. Little of this waste can be landfilled. Many kinds of industrial wastes are not


57

suitable for highway use because they are hazardous or because leachate from these materials are a threat to the environment. Through treatment, some industrial wastes otherwise deemed a threat to the environment may be rendered usable. Petroleum-contaminated soils, for instance, once thermally treated, can be used as fill material and have been used in asphalt mixtures as fine aggregates. Petroleum-contaminated soils are not currently being recycled into highway projects but have been used on road and street construction at the local level. The principal recoverable wastes from industrial activities are described below. Coal Ash By-Products. NCHRP Synthesis 199 cites an American Coal Ash Association publication, (Coal Combustion By-Product Production and Consumption. 1992) when noting that 66 million tons (60 109 kg) of coal ash is produced annually from the 420 coal-burning power plants across the country. Coal is either anthracite, bituminous, or lignite (subbituminous); the particular form has a bearing on the characteristics of the by-products. Fly Ash. ASTM divides fly ash into two classes: class F, from anthracite coal; and class C, from lignite coal. Class F fly ash reacts with calcium and water at ordinary temperatures to form a cementlike compound. Class C fly ash has a higher lime content than class F fly ash and can be self-setting. To be usable as a cementitious substitute for Portland cement, fly ash must meet quality standards established by ASTM (Standard C-618). Approximately 25 percent of the fly ash produced meets this standard, yet only about half of the viable resource is being used. Bottom Ash and Boiler Slag. Bottom ash and boiler slag are also by-products of coal burning, amounting to approximately 18 million tons (16 109 kg) of waste produced annually. These by-products are being researched for use in embankments, unbound aggregate, and asphalt paving and antiskid material. Blast-Furnace Slag. Slag that is the by-product of producing iron in a blast furnace is nonferrous and consists of silicates and aluminosilicates of lime. Of the three types of slag produced from blast furnaces (expanded, granular, and air cooled), about 90 percent of that recovered for use in construction is air cooled. Air-cooled slag is porous and suitable for use as aggregate in lightweight concrete, in asphalt, in roadway bases, and in fill material. Granulated slag can be finely ground as slag cement, and expanded slag can be used as aggregate in lightweight concrete. The primary barrier to use of slag is that it was not separated into homogeneous piles and it was mixed with steel slag. Steel Slag. Steel slag is the product of lime flux reacting with products in a steel furnace such as pig iron. Steel slag consists of calcium, iron, unslaked lime, and magnesium. It can be very expansive if not properly “aged” through treatment with water. Because of its characteristics of being very hard, stable, and abrasion-resistant, it is used in paving material and snow control. It is heavier than most aggregate and has been used as fill material and as railroad ballast. However, some concern has developed recently that the leachate from these two uses clogs drains and can affect receiving waters. About 7.9 million tons (7.2 109 kg) of steel slag is sold in the United States annually. Nonferrous Slag. Slag from smelting operations for other ores such as copper, lead, zinc, nickel, and phosphates is grouped together under a single heading. Each must be evaluated and treated separately because of the varying properties these slags possess. Phosphate slag, copper oxide blasting slag, and zinc slag have been used as aggregate in paving mixtures. Aluminum slag has been used experimentally for asphalt paving aggregate, but the material proved not to be durable and is no longer used.

58

CHAPTER ONE

Foundry Wastes. It is estimated that 3 million tons (2.7 109 kg) of foundry wastes are produced annually in the United States, including furnace dust, arc furnace dust, and sand residue. Foundries are concentrated primarily in the Great Lakes states. Foundry dust is often disposed of as hazardous material because of its high concentration of metals. Foundry sand, however, is not generally hazardous and has been used as fill material, pipe bedding, and fine aggregate in paving mixtures. Tests must be conducted on the material prior to reuse to determine the properties of the leachate and to ensure that it is environmentally safe. Research into the use of foundry sand is being conducted by departments of transportation in five states, and its use has met with limited success. The permanence of foundry sand as pipe bedding in Illinois, however, was not considered acceptable. Flue Gas Desulfurization Sludge. Flue gas desulfurization sludge (FGD) is the product of wet scrubbing of flue gases at coal-burning plants and consists of calcium sulfate or sulfite slurry. These slurries are generally landfilled. By dewatering FGD (especially the sulfate slurries) and blending it with a reactant such as portland cement, or cement fly ash, the mixture can be used as stabilized base material or as fill material. FGD has also been used as a dust control palliative, and additional uses are being investigated. Paper Mill Wastes. Inorganic paper mill sludge has been used occasionally for dust control on highway projects. Although research has indicated that spent sulfide liquor from the paper milling process may have application in soil stabilization, it is believed that a higher level of use exists for the material within the paper industry. The ash residue from burning bark at paper mills, when pulverized with coal and burned, has been shown to be as effective a portland cement substitute as class F fly ash and is being considered for use in highway projects.

1.6.5 Mining Waste Coal Refuse. Coarse coal refuse from mining operations is produced at a rate of 120 million tons (109 10 9 kg) per year. Coarse material is banked, while fine coal refuse is put into a silt-sized slurry mix and placed in impoundments. It is estimated that up to 4 billion tons (3.6 1012 kg) of coal mining refuse has accumulated in the United States. Concern about spontaneous combustion and leachate of the material (composed of slate and shale with sandstone and clay mixed in) has impeded in-depth studies of the use of coal waste. It is currently being evaluated for use in embankments and as subbase material, two applications that reportedly have been used in the past. Quarry Wastes. Fairly consistent wastes consisting of fines from stone washing, crushing, and screening and wet, silty clay from washing of sand and gravel are produced from quarrying operations. Most quarry waste is not reusable or sized within standard specifications, are stockpiled in ponds. Reclamation through dewatering and segregating coarse and fine materials would be necessary to use the 175 million tons (159 109 kg) of quarry waste produced each year, or any of the approximately 4 billion tons (3.6 1012 kg) that have accumulated in the United States. The mineral properties and characteristics of the waste differ from quarry to quarry, limiting the beneficial end use, but quarry wastes have been used as fill and borrow material, flowable fill, and cement-treated subbase. Mill Tailings. Mill tailings are the remains left after processing ore to concentrate it. Large amounts of mill tailing are generated from copper, iron, lead, zinc, and uranium ores.


59

They have been used as fill materials, in base courses, and in asphalt mixtures for years in areas where they are abundant and conventional sources are limited. Because of the metal content in the mill tailings, the stockpiles must be carefully analyzed to characterize leachate properties before use would be is deemed appropriate. Waste Rock. Surface mining operations and subsurface mining operations produce an estimated 1 billion ton of waste rock annually in the United States. Some have been used as construction aggregate and in embankments; however, transportation costs from remote mines to construction areas often render the use of the rock economically infeasible. Where transportation is reasonable, waste rock can be used as stone fill for embankments or as riprap, or crushed for aggregate. These uses have been shown to be successful. Environmental considerations of leachate, low-level radiation, and sulfuric acid content should be investigated before use is deemed appropriate.

1.6.6 Agricultural Waste Recycled agricultural waste has potential for use in many applications not related to highways. Uses of agricultural wastes (with a few notable exceptions) in highways are usually restricted to landscaping applications. It is estimated that more than 2 billion tons (1.8 1012 kg) of agricultural waste is produced each year in the United States. This represents about 46 percent of the total waste produced in the United States each year. Animal Manure. Animal manure is produced at a rate of 1.6 billion tons (1.5 1012 kg) annually in the United States. Other than its use as fertilizer or as composting material for landscaping rights-of-way, it has little recycling value for highways. Crop (Green) Waste. Of the 400 million tons (363 109 kg) of crop waste produced annually from harvesting operations and grain processing, the potential to use rice husk ash to increase compressive strength in concrete is the most promising highway use. Research has also been conducted into converting cellulose waste to an oil appropriate as an asphalt extender. Logging and Wood Waste. It is estimated that about 70 million tons (64 109 kg) of lumber waste from logging and milling operations is produced each year. Only about onethird of the wood from logged trees is used as lumber. Much of the remainder is used in other industry applications. Uses in highways include mulching and lightweight fill material for embankments or to repair slides. Application as lightweight fill material has been well documented and proven to be successful. Life expectancy of such embankments is estimated at 50 years.

1.6.7 Domestic Waste It is estimated that approximately 4 lb of domestic refuse is generated every day for every person in the United States, of which about 3 lb (1.4 kg) per day goes to domestic land-fills and 11 percent is recycled. It is estimated that about 185 million tons (168 109 kg) of domestic waste is generated per year in the United States. Several of these wastes have a potential for reuse in highways. Refuse. Landfill refuse is not sought for reuse in highway construction because there is little homogeneity among landfill refuse, and so a great deal of analysis and separation

60

CHAPTER ONE

would be required at individual landfills to determine the potential for use. However, there have been occasions when a highway right-of-way traverses a landfill. In such cases, analysis to find appropriate on-site placement of the refuse instead of costly relocation and disposal has been found to be cost-effective. The refuse was spread in thin layers and compacted into embankment material or used for raised medians. Paper and Paperboard. Approximately 40 percent of the domestic waste generated in the United States is paper or cardboard. Approximately 25 percent of the wastepaper products are recycled each year and used primarily in making more paper, cardboard, and related materials. A highway use of wastepaper, particularly slick paper such as magazine paper, is in the production of mulch material. Yard Waste and Compost. There are over 1400 yard waste composting stations in the country. Yard waste is banned completely from landfills in many states. Compost material must meet pathogen control, pH, metal concentration, nitrogen ratio, water-bearing capacity, maturity, particle size, and nutrient content control standards set by the EPA. Compost materials are used for mulching, soil amendment, fertilizers, and erosion control. Concerns related to leaching potential, odors, worker health and safety, long-term exposure, and public acceptance have limited use in highways to the experimental stage, except in landscape use. Plastics. The amount of plastic waste generated each year is growing. Recycling plastics is complicated in that plastics are developed from at least six different resin bases, which must be sorted for the most-effective recycling. About 30 percent of the plastics made from polyethylene terephthalate (PET), the resin base of soda bottles, is recycled. One use of PET is as a geotextile. Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) resin from film and trash bags can be recycled into pellets for use as an asphalt modifier in paving mixes. High-density polyethylene (HOPE) from milk jugs has been used in manufacturing plastic posts. Reuse of commingled plastics is more difficult but has been applied in fencing and posts. Such plastics have also been used as traffic delineators. Glass. The amount of glass containers produced each year is declining, but about 12.5 million tons (11.3 109 kg) of glass is disposed of as domestic waste each year. To be reused in glass manufacturing, glass must be sorted according to color. Uses in highways include as fine aggregate in unbound base courses, as pipe bedding, as aggregate in asphalt mixes, and as glass beads in traffic paint. Ceramics. Ceramic waste consists of factory rejects and discarded housewares and plumbing fixtures. Only in infrequent instances are large quantities of waste ceramics available for reuse in large applications, such as highway projects. In California, crushed porcelain has been used as an unbound base course aggregate. Crushed porcelain has been found to meet or exceed quality requirements for concrete aggregate. Incinerator Ash. Incinerator ash results from the burning of municipal waste. About 26 million tons (24 109 kg) of incinerator ash is produced each year, of which 90 percent is bottom ash and the remainder is fly ash. Fly ash often exceeds regulatory limits for concentrations of lead and cadmium. Fly ash is most often mixed with bottom ash, and this mixture generally does not contain sufficient concentrations of metals to render it hazardous. Incinerator ash has been used successfully as a partial replacement of coarse aggregate in asphalt mixtures, as roadway fill, and in base course construction when stabilized with Portland cement. Concerns on the part of the EPA about the leaching of heavy metals have initiated several studies.


61

Sewer Sludge Ash. More than 15,000 municipal wastewater treatment plants in the country produce over 8 million tons (7 109 kg) of dry solids of sewage sludge. Following dewatering, sludge cake contains between 18 and 24 percent solids consisting mostly of nitrogen and phosphorus, but may be contaminated from various wastewater streams. Much of this sludge cake is incinerated, producing about 1 million tons (0.9 109 kg) of ash a year. Sludge ash has the potential for use as an asphalt filler and use in brick manufacturing. Studies indicate that with heat treatment, the ash can produce lightweight pellets that can increase concrete compressive strength by 15 percent when replacing aggregate. Sewage sludge ash has been used as a mineral filler in asphalt paving in Iowa, Minnesota, and other states. Sewage sludge can be composted for agricultural uses such as soil amendments, compost, or fertilizer. Recycled municipal sewage sludge can be a health and safety concern for highway workers using it in landscaping. Scrap Tires. In 1994, NCHRP published findings of a 5-year review and synthesis of all of the states’ highway practices involving the use of waste tires. This document, entitled Uses of Recycled Rubber Tires in Highways, is the result of a compilation of over 500 sources of information on the topic. The discussion in this section is a synopsis of the information provided in that document. A copy of the document can be obtained through the Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20418. It is estimated that 2 to 3 billion waste tires have accumulated in the United States, about 70 percent of which are dumped illegally throughout the countryside or disposed of in unauthorized, uncontrolled stockpiles. Also, scrap fires account for about 2 percent of the solid waste that is disposed in regulated landfills. Each year an additional 242 million more scrap tires add to the nation’s solid waste dilemma. Scrap tires are regulated under RCRA Subtitle D as a nonhazardous waste. However, if they are burned, the resulting residue, which may consist of oils, carbon black, and metal-concentrated ash, may be hazardous. In addition, leachate from tire-based products may also be a hazardous or toxic concern. Potential uses of scrap tires in highways and related facilities are numerous. Table 1.17 identifies the uses of tires in transportation facilities in several states. The environmental implications of the use of scrapped tires in pavement are issues of emissions from the manufacture and placement of rubber asphalt. Leachate is also a major concern, particularly of metals (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, selenium, and zinc) and PAHs (polyaromatic hydrocarbons). A Minnesota study conducted in wetland areas concluded that the use of waste tires in asphalt-rubber pavements may affect groundwater quality. The study’s results were comparable to two other studies with regard to metal leachates, but PAH leachate concentrations were not confirmed by the other studies. Mitigation measures suggested in the Minnesota study would be to place tire materials only in unsaturated zones of the subgrade or fill areas and not below the water table or within surface water boundaries. A Wisconsin study that scrap, shredded, and crumbed tires were not hazardous, nor did they release significant amounts of priority pollutants. Several studies have indicated that the emissions in asphalt-rubber operations are not significantly higher than with conventional asphalt concrete. The one exception to this may be the release of methyl isobutyl ketone, which appears to be consistently slightly higher than with the conventional mixture. The results of these studies should be used with caution, in that the tires from which asphalt rubber is made are not of the same chemical composition, and are continuing to change. The rubber-asphalt formulation process also varies significantly, changing the emissions and leachable properties of the asphalt rubber. Comparison difficulties are compounded in that the composition and

62

Membrane

Retaining wall

Erosion use

Type of use

Routine use Routine use Routine use on bridge decks Experimental use

California Oregon Washington Wisconsin

Experimental retaining wall

Rhode Island Membrane to control expansive subgrade soils Shoulder membrane Ditch membrane

Experimental retaining wall

Arizona

Anchored timber walls

Experimental project

Wisconsin North Carolina

Side slope fill

Vermont

California

Pending project

Pennsylvania

Less moisture fluctuations Seal out moisture Prevent cracking Ride quality Lower maintenance cost

Disposal Flatten side slope

Disposal

Availability of tires

Slope reinforcement

Windbreaks

Advantages Disposal Low cost Erosion control

Description of use Shoulder reinforcement Channel slope protection

Louisiana

California

State

TABLE 1.17 Uses of Scrap Tires in Transportation Facilities Concerns

Unloading Leachate Cost

Pull-out values

Visual acceptance by public Labor intensive Cost

63 Vermont Minnesota

Culvert

Interlocking block

Erosion control, safety barriers, retaining walls, dikes, levees

Whole tires bound together to form culvert

Aggregate drain rock replacement

Ease of installation Shock absorbing Resist chemical damage Durability

Cost

Water-draining Stable roadway

Strength Durability Lightweight Sound loss

Ease of installation Reduced maintenance Easy to adjust Durability

Ease of installation Smooth Reduced maintenance Potential reuse

Disposal Low cost Maintenance

Leachate

Burning Smoke

Debris Deceleration of vehicle

Tires become projectiles

Adapted from Uses of Recycled Rubber Tires in Highways, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Transportation Research Board, Washington,

Pennsylvania

Drainage material

Source: D.C., 1994.

California Ontario Laminated tires for planks and posts Sound barrier walls

Experimental only

Pennsylvania Oregon

Routine use

Bases for tubular markers Pending projects Bases for vertical panel supports

Oregon Pennsylvania Texas Oregon

Experimental project Tire-sand inertial barrier

Colorado Connecticut

Planks and posts

Valve box coverings

Railroad crossings

Safety hardware

64

CHAPTER ONE TABLE 1.18 Highway Uses of Scrap Tires Common uses Fills and embankments Erosion control Shoulder stabilization Channel slope protection Windbreak Side slope fill Slope reinforcement Retaining wall Membranes Safety hardware Tire-sand inertial barrier

Innovative uses Railroad grade crossing Valve box coverings Drainable materials Planks and posts Culverts Interlocking blocks

Source: Based on National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Transportation Research Board, Uses of Recycled Rubber Tires in Highways, Washington, D.C., 1994.

formulation processes for the conventional concrete asphalt that is being used for a standard vary tremendously also. Common and innovative uses of scrap tires are summarized in Table 1.18.

1.6.8 End Uses in Highways It is apparent that there are many uses of recycled materials in highway construction and related applications. Table 1.19 provides a summary of these uses for reference.

1.6.9 Recycling Hazardous Wastes Under Subtitle C of RCRA, EPA has the authority to regulate recyclable hazardous waste material. It is critical to determine the type of waste and the proposed method of recycling in determining whether it is regulated under Subtitle C. The definition of solid waste under Section 261.2 identifies four types of recycling activities for which recycled wastes may be subject to Subtitle C regulation: use constituting disposal, burning waste-derived fuels for energy recovery, reclamation, and speculative reclamation. Use Constituting Disposal. Use constituting disposal is defined as placing or applying a solid waste or a material contained in a product that was a solid waste on the land in a manner constituting disposal. In this case, land disposal regulations under RCRA Parts 264 and 265 apply. Use constituting disposal may include the following uses involved in the construction of highways or maintenance of highway landscaping: fill material, cover material, fertilizer, soil conditioner, dust suppressor, asphalt additive, and foundation material. Burning and Blending of Waste Fuels. Burning and blending would be the applicable method for recycling used oil for fuel in asphalt plants. Used oil is not currently considered a hazardous waste unless it has a characteristic of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or extraction procedure toxicity (ICRE characteristic). If the used oil is mixed with a hazardous waste, it is regulated as a hazardous waste fuel under RCRA, Part 266, Subpart D. Specifications for nonhazardous used oil fuel are described in Table 1.20. Used oils that do

65

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TABLE 1.19 Applications of Recycled Materials in Highways

Asphalt: Crop waste and other cellulose material may be reduced to an oil suitable for asphalt extender. Asphalt paving aggregate: Incinerator ash. Asphalt mineral filler: Sewage sludge ash, fly ash, baghouse fines, cement kiln dust, lime waste. Asphalt-rubber binder: Scrap tires. Asphalt stress-absorbing membranes: Scrap tires. Asphalt rubberized crack sealant: Scrap tires. Asphalt aggregate: Mill tailings, phosphogypsum, slag. Asphalt fine aggregate: Glass and ceramics. Asphalt cement modifier: Plastic waste. Asphalt plant fuel: Used motor oil. Asphalt paving: Bottom ash, boiler slag, blast furnace slag, steelmaking slag, nonferrous slag, reclaimed asphalt pavement, foundry sand, roofing shingle waste, petroleum-contaminated soils (after thermal treatment). Base course: Glass and ceramic waste, construction and demolition debris, nonferrous slags, reclaimed asphalt pavement, reclaimed concrete pavement, mill tailings. Pipe bedding: Foundry sand, glass, and ceramic waste. Borrow material: Quarry waste, construction and demolition material. Slope stabilization and erosion control: Sawdust and wood waste. Mulch: Wood waste, paper waste (especially slick, magazine-type paper), compost. Fertilizer: Animal manure and farm waste. Embankments: Lumber and wood waste, sawdust and wood chips, recycled sanitary landfill refuse, fly ash, bottom ash, construction and demolition waste, sulfate waste, waste rock, mill tailings, coal refuse. Cement stabilized base: Incinerator ash, fly ash, bottom ash, advanced SO2 control by-products, cement kiln dust, reclaimed asphalt pavement, petroleum-contaminated waste (after thermal treatment), coal refuse, and rice husk ash may be used as supplementary cementing material. Concrete: Incinerator ash from sewage sludge cake as vitrified aggregate or palletized aggregate. Lightweight fill material: Wood waste, sawdust, chipped wood, scrap tires. Geotextile: Plastic waste. Sealant: Scrap tires. Safety hardware, fencing, signposts: Plastic wastes. Flowable fill and grout: Quarry waste, fly ash. Soil stabilization: Fly ash, advanced SO2 control by-product, cement kiln dust, lime waste. Antiskid material: Bottom ash, steelmaking slag. Blasting grit: Nonferrous slags.

TABLE 1.20 Specification Levels for Used Oil Fuels Specification

Maximum allowable level

Arsenic concentration Cadmium concentration Chromium concentration Lead concentration Flash point Total halogen concentration (unmixed) Total halogen concentration (mixed)

5 ppm 2 ppm 10 ppm 100 ppm 1000°F 4000 ppm 1000 ppm

Source: Adapted from Travis Wagner, Complete Handbook of Hazardous Waste Regulation, Perry-Wagner Publishing, Brunswick, Maine, 1988, p. 46.

66

CHAPTER ONE

not meet one or all of these specifications and are not mixed with hazardous waste may still be burned in industrial boilers, but they must have an EPA identification number for this activity and must meet a higher standard of reporting than used oil meeting the specifications. A burner of either specification or off-specification used oil fuel must notify EPA of its used-oil-fuel activities and state the location and a general description of the used-oilmanagement activities. Copies of invoices and waste analysis conducted on the used oil must be maintained for at least 3 years. Reclamation. Reclamation is the recovery of materials with value from a waste material and involves regeneration of waste material from the reclamation activities. Recovering precious metals from a waste stream (such as silver from x-ray film) is an example of reclamation. When the lead plates from lead-acid batteries are recovered, the activity is regulated under RCRA as reclamation. Use of material as feed stocks or ingredients in the production of a new product is not considered reclamation. Speculative Accumulation. Any hazardous secondary material is considered a solid waste if accumulated before recycling unless 75 percent of the stockpile is recycled during a calendar year.

CHAPTER 2

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC Larry J. Shannon, P.E. Highway Technical Manager ms Consultants Columbus, Ohio

This chapter begins with a description of the overall transportation development process, and then presents comprehensive information on the various elements of highway location and design. Included is the determination of horizontal and vertical alignment, with attention to obtaining proper sight distance and superelevation. The design of roadway cross sections, intersections, ramps, and service roads is addressed. Traffic aspects include an introduction to intelligent vehicle highway systems and the use of high-occupancy vehicle lanes. A presentation on preparation of highway construction plans and organizing CADD drawings is also provided. A list of references, which are noted in the text, concludes the chapter. Some design issues related to roadside safety are also discussed in Chap. 6.

2.1 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 2.1.1 Statewide Systems Planning The beginnings of any roadway project involving government money are found in a statewide transportation planning program. The state transportation department develops a set of goals and objectives which take into account social, economic, environmental, and developmental goals of other state, federal, and local agencies. Based on these goals and objectives, the department identifies transportation improvement needs throughout the state. The approach is from a multimodal standpoint; that is, not just highways are considered, but all forms of transportation, including public transportation, railroads, water, aviation, bikeways, and pedestrian ways (Ref. 6).

67

68

CHAPTER TWO

2.1.2 Transportation Programming Phase In order to evaluate various projects from various parts of the state, information is collected consisting of the following items: transportation inventories, traffic analyses, modal forecasts, future system requirements, levels of service, population data and forecasts, land use inventories, public facilities plans, and basic social, economic, and environmental data. This information comes from various sources, both public and private, is updated on a regular basis, and is used in developing the state’s transportation improvement program. The statewide fiscal program is also considered in developing the plan. Transportation investment, fiscal forecasts, and consideration of expenditure tradeoffs between modes are some of the financial considerations affecting the project selection process. Public input is sought from regional to local levels. Local and regional planning organizations, as well as private individuals, have a chance to express opinions and provide input to the project selection process. Once all factors have been evaluated, the state announces and publishes its recommended transportation improvement plan. This usually consists of a one-year plan and a five-year plan, with remaining projects grouped under long-range plans.

2.1.3 Project Evaluation Once projects reach the selected lists, the next phase is project evaluation. This phase will determine which projects can advance to detail design and which will require a more detailed evaluation in preliminary development. Projects that can advance directly to design phase meet the following criteria: ●

●

●

●

No additional right-of-way (permanent or temporary) will be required to accomplish the work and there will be no adverse effect on abutting real properties. No major changes in the operation of access points, traffic volumes, traffic flows, vehicle mix, or traffic patterns. No involvement with a live stream or an intermittent stream having significant yearround pools, upstream or downstream, in the immediate vicinity. No involvement with a historic site.

Examples of these types of improvement are: ● ● ●

● ● ●

● ●

Restoration and/or reconstruction of existing pavement surfaces Modernization of an existing facility by adding or widening shoulders Modernization of existing facilities by adding auxiliary lanes or pavement widening to accomplish a localized purpose (weaving, climbing, speed change, protected turn, etc.) Intersection improvements Reconstruction or rehabilitation of existing grade separation structures Reconstruction or rehabilitation of existing stream crossings which do not involve any modification of a live stream or otherwise affect the water quality Landscaping or rest area upgrading projects Lighting, signing, pavement marking, signalization, freeway surveillance and control systems, railroad protective devices, etc.

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC ●

● ●

69

Minor safety-type improvements, such as guiderail replacement or installation of breakaway sign hardware Outdoor advertising control programs Bicycle or pedestrian facilities provided within existing right-of-way

All projects that do not fall into the above categories must undergo additional evaluation in a preliminary development phase.

2.1.4 Preliminary Development Phase Two types of projects are considered here: (1) projects that involve studies outside the existing corridor or where a facility for more than one alternative mode of transportation may be involved, and (2) projects where feasible alternatives are limited to the existing corridor but did not qualify to pass directly to the design phase. The main difference between the two as far as processing is concerned is that the first group has not yet narrowed its alternatives down to feasible alternatives. In each case, a project inventory is developed. This information includes historical sites; public recreational facilities; school, church, fire, and police districts; proposed development; land use; existing and other proposed transportation facilities; preliminary traffic assignments; and other similar social, economic, and environmental features, which are pertinent to the area under study. Using this information as a guide, all preliminary alternatives are developed together with documentation of the anticipated effects on community, preliminary cost estimates, and other technical considerations. Advantages and disadvantages of each alternative are studied. Where appropriate, coordination with other modes is considered. The “no-build” alternative is also considered and provides a reference point for defining potential beneficial and adverse impacts. Public hearings are held to gain input from the local public in the affected areas. Following an evaluation of all input received, alternatives are weighed and only those considered to be feasible are forwarded to the next step. From this point on, all projects in the preliminary development phase are on the same path. Among the environmental concerns which must be considered for each alternative are the following (see also Chap. 1): Air quality. A study of the effect of a proposed transportation improvement on the quality of the air Historic or prehistoric. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on historic or prehistoric objects or on lands or structures currently entered into the National Register or which may be eligible for addition to the National Register Endangered species. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on rare or endangered plants or animals having national or state recognition Natural areas. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on natural areas designated as having regional, state, or national significance Parks and recreation. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on publicly owned parks, recreation areas, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges designated as having national, state, or local significance Prime farmlands. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on farmlands with high productivity due to soil and water conditions or having other unique advantages for growing specialty crops

70

CHAPTER TWO

Scenic rivers. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on any scenic rivers of state or national significance Streams and wetlands. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on streams and wetlands on project and abutting land areas Water quality. A study of the effect of the proposed transportation improvement on the quality of live streams or bodies of water The next step is a refinement of feasible alternatives. This requires additional work sufficient to prepare an environment document. This could include such items as approximate construction costs; alignment and profile studies; typical section development; preliminary designs for geometric layout, drainage, right-of-way, and utilities; location of interchanges, grade separations, and at-grade intersections; preliminary bridge designs at critical locations; channel work; air, noise, and water studies; flood hazard evaluations; and other supplemental studies and right-of-way information. Once again, input is sought from the public sector through advertisement and public hearings. Figure 2.1 shows the corridors for the feasible alternatives for an 11-mi relocation of U.S. 30 in Ohio (Ref. 13). The map is part of a study evaluating crossroad treatment for each alternative. Figures 2.2 and 2.3 show the projected crossroad treatments for the various alternatives. The options are (1) interchange, (2) grade separation, or (3) closing roads with cul-de-sacs. Since the proposed segment will be a limited-access highway, the option of at-grade intersection was not considered. Figures 2.4 and 2.5 show current and 20-year projected traffic volumes for all roadways. These are examples of maps used in the study of feasible alternatives. After consideration of all the input and comparing the benefits and disadvantages of each alternative, the next step is to make a selection of the recommended alternative. This selection is certified by the state’s transportation director. Following approval of the environmental document, the project may proceed to the design phase.

2.1.5 Detail Design Phase During the detail design phase, various design elements are finalized and construction plans are developed. Project development in this phase can include many intermediate reviews prior to final plan submission. These may include some or all of the following, depending on the complexity of the plan: Traffic request/validation Traffic signal warrant analysis Airway-highway clearance study Alignment, grade, and typical section review Conceptual maintenance of traffic review Structure type study Retaining wall justification Service road justification Preliminary drainage review Preliminary right-of-way review Bridge type, size, and location study Drive review

FIGURE 2.1 Example of map used in study of alternate routes showing four possible corridors. Conversions: 5 mi 8 km, 2000 ft 610 m. (From Justification Study for Crossroad Grade Separations, US 30, by Balke Engineers for Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

71

72

FIGURE 2.2 Example of map used in study of alternate routes showing projected crossroad treatments for western portion of corridor D. (From Justification Study for Crossroad Grade Separations, US 30, by Balke Engineers for Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

73

FIGURE 2.3 Example of map used in study of alternate routes showing projected crossroad treatments for eastern portion of corridor D. (From Justification Study for Crossroad Grade Separations, US 30, by Balke Engineers for Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

74

FIGURE 2.4 Example of map used in study of alternate routes showing projected traffic (ADT, average daily traffic, in years 2000 and 2020) for western portion of corridor D. (From Justification Study for Crossroad Grade Separations, US 30, by Balke Engineers for Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

75

FIGURE 2.5 Example of map used in study of alternate routes showing projected traffic (ADT, average daily traffic, in years 2000 and 2020) for eastern portion of corridor D. (From Justification Study for Crossroad Grade Separations, US 30, by Balke Engineers for Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

76

CHAPTER TWO

Slope review Traffic control Lighting Waterline Sanitary sewer Final roadway, field and office check This is not intended to be an all-inclusive list. The designer should contact the government agency having review and final acceptance authority to see what reviews are required during this phase of plan development. Following acceptance of the final plans, specifications, and estimates, the project is processed for letting. Any necessary consent legislation is obtained. The project is then advertised, bids are taken, and the construction contract is awarded.

2.2 GEOMETRIC DESIGN 2.2.1 Design Controls Once a route has been selected for a new highway, or a decision has been made to perform major work on an existing facility, the next step is to establish the design controls. The various factors considered for design controls may be generally grouped into five categories: functional classification, traffic data, terrain, locale, and design speed. Functional classification is a way of grouping roadways together by the character of service they provide. The initial division is between urban and rural roadways. The urban classification may be defined differently in various parts of the country, but one definition is incorporated areas having a population of 5000 or more (Ref. 1). Rural areas are those areas outside of urban areas. Each of these may be further subdivided into other classifications defined as follows: Interstate. Roadways on the federal system with the highest design speeds and the highest design standards. Freeway. An expressway with full access control and no at-grade intersections. Expressway. A divided arterial highway with full or partial control of access and generally having grade separations at major intersections. Arterial. A facility primarily used for through traffic, usually on a continuous route. Collector. An intermediate roadway system which connects arterials with the local road or street systems. Local road or street. A road whose primary function is to provide access to residences, businesses, or other abutting properties. Traffic data are an important foundation in highway design. The information used in design is usually a future forecast on the basis of existing traffic counts and expanded on the basis of normal expected growth in the area or enhanced by estimates of future business, commercial, or residential development. Most highway designs are based on

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC

77

what traffic demands will be 20 years from the current year. Shorter time periods, such as 10 years, may apply to resurfacing projects or other minor repair projects. It is important that within the same jurisdiction traffic data be forecast using the same methods and techniques, in order to ensure similar designs for similar type roadways. This is especially true for roadways in a given state jurisdiction. The following types of traffic numbers are used most frequently in design: Average daily traffic (ADT). The average number of vehicles using a roadway in a 24-hour period. Design hourly volume (DHV). The estimated number of vehicles using the roadway in the 30th highest hour of the year. This number is generally 8 to 12 percent of the ADT and is used extensively in determining lane widths and shoulder characteristics of the roadway cross section. Directional design hourly volume (DDHV). The estimated number of vehicles traveling in one direction of a two-way roadway in the 30th highest hour of the year. This number must be at least 50 percent of the DHV and is usually in the range of 50 to 60 percent. A higher value would indicate that the roadway is a major link in the commuter network, carrying a heavy inbound load in the morning and reversing that flow in the evening. Truck percentage (T). The portion of the ADT which consists of B and C trucks. Traffic counts are usually separated according to vehicle type: P passenger cars (%) A commercial (%), consisting of light delivery trucks, panel trucks, and pickup trucks B commercial (%), consisting of semitrailer and truck-trailer combinations C commercial (%), consisting of buses or dual-tired trucks having single or tandem rear axles Traffic counts sometimes group the P and A vehicles together and the B and C together. Terrain is a factor that can significantly influence design features, especially in rural areas. Various categories of terrain are level, rolling, and hilly. They are further described as follows: Level terrain. Any combination of grades and horizontal and vertical alignment permitting heavy vehicles to maintain approximately the same speed as passenger cars. Grades are generally limited to 1 or 2 percent. Rolling terrain. Any combination of grades and horizontal and vertical alignment causing heavy vehicles to reduce their speeds substantially below those of passenger cars, but not to operate at crawl speeds. Hilly terrain. Any combination of grades and horizontal and vertical alignment causing heavy vehicles to operate at crawl speed. Heavy vehicles are defined as any vehicle having a weight (pounds) to horsepower ratio of 200 or greater (Ref. 1). Crawl speed is defined as the maximum sustained speed heavy vehicles can maintain on an extended upgrade. See Ref. 1 for graphs showing the effect of grades on acceleration and deceleration of heavy vehicles. Locale describes the character and extent of development in the vicinity. It can be considered commercial, industrial, or residential, as well as rural or urban.

78 TABLE 2.1

CHAPTER TWO Relationship between Design Controls and Design Features Design controls Design features

Lane width, rural Lane width, urban Rural shoulder width, type Urban shoulder width, type Guiderail offset Degree of curve Grades Bridge clearances (horizontal and vertical) Stopping sight distance Passing and intersection sight distance Decision sight distance Superelevation Widening on curves Rural design speeds Urban design speeds Vertical alignment Horizontal alignment

Functional Traffic classification data X X X X X X X

X

Terrain

Locale

X

X X

X X X X

X X

X X

X

X X X X

Design speed

X

X X X X X

X X

X X X

X X

Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

Design speed is defined as “a selected speed used to determine the various geometric design features of the roadway” (Ref. 1). When designing new or reconstructed roadways, the design speed should always equal or exceed the proposed legal speed of the roadway. Table 2.1 (Ref. 7) shows the relationship of the functional classification, traffic data, terrain, locale, and design speed to the various geometric design features listed on the chart. It should be noted that there are situations when it will not be possible or reasonable to meet the design standard for a particular feature in a given project. When this occurs, the designer must bring this to the attention of the reviewing authority for approval of what is being proposed, or suggestions on what other course of action to take. A design exception must be approved by the reviewing authority when a substandard feature is allowed to remain as part of the design. In this way, it can be documented that this was not an error or oversight on the part of the designer and that every effort has been made to provide the best design possible in the given situation.

2.2.2 Sight Distance A primary feature in the design of any roadway is the availability of adequate sight distance for the driver to make decisions while driving. In the articles that follow, the text contains conclusions based on information contained in Ref. 1. Derivation of formulas and references to supporting research are contained in that document and will not be repeated here. The reader is encouraged to consult that document for more detailed background information. The following paragraphs discuss various sight distances and the role they play in the design of highways.


79

Stopping Sight Distance. Stopping sight distance is the distance ahead that a motorist should be able to see so that the vehicle can be brought safely to a stop short of an obstruction or foreign object on the road. This distance will include the driver’s reaction or perception distance and the distance traveled while the brakes are being applied. The total distance traveled varies with the initial speed, the brake reaction time, and the coefficient of friction for wet pavements and average tires. The values in Table 2.2 were developed using a reaction time of 2.5 s and a braking deceleration rate of 11.2 ft/s2 (3.4 m/s2). The height of eye was taken as 3.50 ft (1.07 m) and the height of the object as 2.00 ft (0.61 m). When considering the effect of stopping sight distance, it is necessary to check both the horizontal and the vertical stopping sight distance. Horizontal sight distance may be restricted on the inside of horizontal curves by objects such as bridge piers, buildings, concrete barriers, guiderail, cut slopes, etc. Figure 2.6 shows a diagram describing how horizontal sight distance is checked along an extended curve. Both formulas and a nomograph are provided to enable a solution. Many times, where the curve is not long enough or there are a series of roadway horizontal curves, a plotted-out “graphic” solution will be required to determine the available horizontal sight distance. TABLE 2.2 Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) for Design Speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h) Design speed, mi/h

Design SSD, ft

Design speed, mi/h

Design SSD, ft

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

115 120 130 140 145 155 165 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 305 315 325 340 350 360

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

375 385 400 415 425 440 455 465 480 495 510 525 540 555 570 585 600 615 630 645 665 680 695 715 730

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

80

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.6 Horizontal sight distance along curve. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

When a cut slope is the potential restriction, the offset should be measured to a point on the backslope having the same elevation as the average of the roadway where the driver is, and the location of the lane downstream where a potential hazardous object lies. In this way, an allowance of 2.75 ft (0.84 m) of vegetative growth on the backslope can be made, since the driver’s eye is assumed to be 3.5 ft (1.07 m) above the pavement and the top of a 2.0-ft (0.61-m) hazardous object downstream may still be seen. Vertical sight distance may be restricted by the presence of vertical curves in the roadway profile. The sight distance on a crest vertical curve is based on a driver’s


81

ability to see a 2.0-ft-high (0.61-m) object in the roadway without being blocked by the pavement surface. The height of eye for the driver used in the calculations is 3.5 ft (1.07 m). The sight distance on a sag vertical curve is dependent on the driver’s being able to see the pavement surface as illuminated by headlights at night. The height of the headlight is assumed to be 2.0 ft (0.61 m), and the height of the object is 0.0. The upward divergence angle of the headlight beam is assumed to be 1°. Intersection Sight Distance. A motorist attempting to enter or cross a highway from a stopped condition should be able to observe traffic at a distance that will allow safe movement. In cases where traffic is intermittent or moderate in flow, the motorist will wait to find an acceptable “gap.” The driver approaching the intersection on the through road should have a clear view of the intersection including any vehicles stopped, waiting to cross, or turning. The methods described in the following paragraphs produce distances that provide sufficient sight distance for the stopped driver to make a safe crossing or turning maneuver. If these distances cannot be obtained, the minimum sight distance provided should not be less than the stopping sight distance for the through roadway. This would allow a driver on the through roadway adequate time to bring the vehicle to a stop if the waiting vehicle started to cross the intersection and suddenly stopped or stalled. If this distance cannot be provided, additional safety measures must be provided. These could include, but are not limited to, advance warning signals and flashers and/or reduced speed limit zones in the vicinity of the intersection. There are three possible maneuvers for a motorist stopped at an intersection to make. The motorist can (1) cross the intersection by clearing oncoming traffic on both the left and right of the crossing vehicle, (2) turn left into the crossing roadway after first clearing the traffic on the left and then making a safe entry into the traffic stream from the right, or (3) turn right into the crossing roadway by making a safe entry into the traffic stream from the left. In order to evaluate the amount of sight distance available to a stopped vehicle waiting to make a crossing or turning maneuver, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) adopted the concept of using “sight triangles” (Ref. 1). The vertices of the triangles are (a) the waiting driver’s position, (b) the approaching driver’s position, and (c) the intersection of the paths of the two vehicles, assuming a straight-ahead path for the waiting vehicles. Figure 2.7 shows the concept of sight triangles, emphasizing both the horizontal and vertical elements to be considered. The shaded area in the triangles is to be free of objects that would obstruct the field of vision for either driver. The profile view shows the limiting effect of vertical curvature of the through roadway. Notice that the height of eye of the drivers (3.50 ft or 1.07 m) is used for both the waiting and approaching vehicles. This stresses the importance of both drivers being able to see each other. Table 2.3A provides intersection sight distance values for through vehicle speeds from 15 to 70 mi/h (24 to 113 km/h). The distances are based on a time gap of 7.5 s for a passenger vehicle turning left and a gap of 6.5 s for a crossing or right-turning vehicle. The height of eye and object were taken as 3.50 ft (1.07 m). The table also provides K values for crest vertical curves that would provide the required sight distance. (See Art. 2.2.4 for a discussion of vertical curvature.) Formulas are provided so that distances can be calculated for trucks requiring a longer time gap and for time adjustments due to upgrades or multiple lane crossings. See the notes in Table 2.3A, which explain how to adjust the timings. Passing Sight Distance. In Table 2.3B, the “PSD” column lists the distances required for passing an overtaken vehicle at various design speeds. These distances are applicable

82

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.7 Intersection sight triangles. (a) Sight triangles. (b) Vertical components. a1 the distance, along the minor road, from the decision point to 1⁄2 the lane width of the approaching vehicle on the major road. a2 the distance, along the minor road, from the decision point to 11⁄2 the lane width of the approaching vehicle on the major road. b intersection sight distance (ISD). d the distance from the edge of the traveled way of the major road to the decision point; the distance should be a minimum of 14.4 ft (4.39 m) and 17.8 ft (5.43 m) preferred. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

to two-lane roadways only. Among the assumptions that affect the required distance calculations are (1) the passing vehicle averages 10 mi/h (1.61 km/h) faster than the vehicle being passed, (2) the vehicle being passed travels at a constant speed and this speed is the average running speed (which is less than the design speed), and (3) the oncoming vehicle is traveling at the same speed as the passing vehicle. Table 2.3B contains K values for designing crest vertical curves to provide passing sight distance. These values assume that the height of the driver’s eye is 3.5 ft (1.07 m) for both the passing and the oncoming vehicle. The equations at the bottom of the table provide mathematical solutions for sight distance on the crest curves. On two-lane roadways, it is important to provide adequate passing sight distance for as much of the project length as possible to compensate for missed opportunities due to oncoming traffic in the passing zone. On roadways where the design hourly traffic volume exceeds 400, the designer should investigate the effect of available passing sight distance on highway capacity using procedures outlined in the latest Transportation Research Board “Highway Capacity Manual” (Ref. 10). If the available passing sight distance restricts the capacity from meeting the design level of service requirement, then adjustments should be made to the profile to increase the distance.

83

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.3A Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) for Design Speeds from 15 to 70 mi/h (24 to 113 km/h) Passenger cars completing a left turn from a stop (assuming a tg of 7.5 s)

Passenger cars completing a right turn from a stop or crossing maneuver (assuming a tg of 6.5 s)

Design speed, mi/h

ISD, ft

K-crest vertical curve

ISD, ft


15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

170 225 280 335 390 445 500 555 610 665 720 775

10 18 28 40 54 71 89 110 133 158 185 214

145 195 240 290 335 385 430 480 530 575 625 670

8 14 21 30 40 53 66 82 100 118 140 160

If ISD cannot be provided due to environmental or R/W constraints, then as a minimum, the SSD for vehicles on the major road should be provided. ISD 1.47 Vmajor tg

Using S intersection sight distance L length of crest vertical curve A algebraic difference in grades (%), absolute value K rate of vertical curvature

ISD intersection sight distance, ft Vmajor design speed of major road, mi/h

●

tg time gap for minor road vehicle to enter the major roads, s

●

For a given design speed and an A value, the calculated length L K A. To determine S with a given L and A, use the following: For S L: S 52.92 兹K 苶, where K L/A For S L: S 1400/A L/2

Note: For design criteria pertaining to collectors and local roads with ADT less than 400, please refer to Ref. 15, Guidelines for Geometric Design of Very Low-Volume Local Roads (ADT 400). Time gaps Design vehicle

Time gap(s) at design speed of major road (tg ), s

A. Left turn from a stop

Passenger car Single-unit truck Combination truck

7.5 9.5 11.5

B. Right turn from a stop or crossing maneuver

Passenger car Single-unit truck Combination truck

6.5 8.5 10.5 (Continued)

84

CHAPTER TWO TABLE 2.3A Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) for Design Speeds from 15 to 70 mi/h (24 to 113 km/h) (Continued) A. Note: The ISD and time gaps shown in the above tables are for a stopped vehicle to turn left onto a two-lane highway with no median and grades of 3 percent or less. For other conditions, the time gap must be adjusted as follows: ●

●

For multilane highways: For left turns onto two-way highways with more than two lanes, add 0.5 s for passenger cars or 0.7 s for trucks for each additional lane, from the left, in excess of one, to be crossed by the turning vehicle. For minor road approach grades: If the approach grade is an upgrade that exceeds 3 percent, add 0.2 s for each percent grade for left turns.

B. Note: The ISD and time gaps shown in the above tables are for a stopped vehicle to turn right onto a two-lane highway with no median and grades of 3 percent or less. For other conditions, the time gap must be adjusted as follows: ●

●

For multilane highways: For crossing a major road with more than two lanes, add 0.5 s for passenger cars or 0.7 s for trucks for each additional lane to be crossed and for narrow medians that cannot store the design vehicle. For minor road approach grades: If the approach grade is an upgrade that exceeds 3 percent, add 0.1 s for each percent grade.


If the problem cannot be resolved in this manner, then consideration should be given to providing passing lane sections or constructing a multilane facility. Decision Sight Distance. Stopping sight distances are usually sufficient to allow reasonably competent drivers to come to a hurried stop under ordinary circumstances. However, these distances may not be sufficient for drivers when information is difficult to perceive, or when unexpected maneuvers are required. In these circumstances, the decision sight distance provides a greater length for drivers to reduce the likelihood of error in receiving information, making decisions, or controlling the vehicle. The following are examples of locations where it is desirable to provide decision sight distance: (1) exit ramps, (2) diverging roadway terminals, (3) intersection stop bars, (4) changes in cross section, such as toll plazas and lane drops, and (5) areas of concentrated demand where there is apt to be “visual noise” (i.e., where sources of information compete, such as roadway elements, traffic, traffic control devices, and advertising signs). Table 2.4 shows decision sight distances based on design speed and avoidance maneuvers. The table lists values for five different avoidance maneuvers. Maneuvers A (rural stop) and B (urban stop) are calculated similar to the standard stopping sight distance values, except that perception times are increased to 3.0 s for rural environment and 9.1 s for urban. For maneuvers C (rural area), D (suburban area), and E (urban area), the braking component is replaced by an avoidance maneuver. This can be a change in speed, path, or direction. Values shown are calculated based on distance traveled during the perception-maneuver time. This time varies with speed and ranges from 10.2 to 10.7 s for rural areas, 12.1 to 12.4 s for suburban areas, and 14.0 to 14.1 s for


85

TABLE 2.3B Minimum Passing Sight Distance (PSD) for Design Speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h) PSD Design speed, mi/h

Minimum PSD, ft


20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

710 900 1090 1280 1470 1625 1835 1985 2135 2285 2480

180 289 424 585 772 943 1203 1407 1628 1865 2197

Using S minimum passing sight distance L length of crest vertical curve A algebraic difference in grades (%), absolute value K rate of vertical curvature ●

●

For a given design speed and an A value, the calculated length L K A. To determine S with a given L and A, use the following: For S L: S 52.92 兹K 苶, where K L/A. For S L: S 1400/A L/2.


urban areas. To calculate available distance on a crest vertical curve, the driver’s eye height is 3.5 ft (1.07 m) and the height of the object to be avoided is 2.0 ft (0.61 m). Where conditions call for the use of a decision sight distance in design that cannot be achieved, every effort should be made to provide the stopping sight distance values from Table 2.2. Consideration should also be given to using suitable traffic control devices to provide advance warning of the unexpected conditions that may be encountered. 2.2.3 Horizontal Alignment and Superelevation The horizontal alignment of a roadway should be designed to provide motorists with a facility for driving in a safe and comfortable manner. Adequate stopping sight distance should be furnished. Also, changes in direction should be accompanied by the use of curves and superelevation when appropriate in accordance with established guidelines. Some changes in alignment are slight and may not require curvature. Table 2.5 lists the maximum deflection angle which may be permitted without the use of a horizontal curve for each design speed shown. It is assumed that a motorist can easily negotiate the change in direction and maintain control over the vehicle without leaving the lane.

86

CHAPTER TWO TABLE 2.4 Decision Sight Distance (DSD) for Design Speeds from 30 to 70 mi/h (48 to 113 km/h) Decision sight distance, ft Avoidance maneuver Design speed, mi/h 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 ●

●

A

B

C

D

E

220 275 330 395 465 535 610 695 780

490 590 690 800 910 1030 1150 1275 1410

450 525 600 675 750 865 990 1050 1105

535 625 715 800 890 980 1125 1220 1275

620 720 825 930 1030 1135 1280 1365 1445

The avoidance maneuvers are as follows: A—rural stop; B—urban stop; C—rural speed/path/direction change; D—suburban speed/path/direction change; E—urban speed/path/direction change Decision sight distance (DSD) is calculated or measured using the same criteria as stopping sight distance: 3.50 ft (1.07 m) eye height and 2.00 ft (0.61 m) object height.


TABLE 2.5 Maximum Centerline Deflection Not Requiring a Horizontal Curve Design speed, mi/h

Maximum deflection*

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

5°30´ 3°45´ 2°45´ 2°15´ 1°45´ 1°15´ 1°00´ 1°00´ 0°45´ 0°45´

Based on the following formulas: Design speed 50 mi/h or over: tan 1.0/V Design speed under 50 mi/h: tan 60/V 2 where V design speed, mi/h

deflection angle Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Note: The recommended minimum distance between consecutive horizontal deflections is: 200 ft where design speed 45 mi/h 100 ft where design speed 45 mi/h *Rounded to nearest 15 min. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.


87

When centerline deflections exceed the values in Table 2.5, it is necessary to introduce a horizontal curve to assist the driver. Curves are usually accompanied by superelevation, which is a banking of the roadway to help counteract the effect of centrifugal force on the vehicle as it moves through the curve. In addition to superelevation, centrifugal force is also offset by the side friction developed between the tires of the vehicle and the pavement surface. The relationship of the two factors when considering curvature for a particular design speed is expressed by the following equation: V2 U.S. units: e f 15R V2 SI units: e f 127R where e f V R

(2.1a) (2.1b)

superelevation rate, ft per ft (m per m) of pavement width side friction factor design speed, mi/h (km/h) radius of curve, ft (m)

In developing superelevation guidelines for use in designing roadways, it is necessary to establish practical limits for both superelevation and side friction factors. Several factors affect the selection of a maximum superelevation rate for a given highway. Climate must be considered. Regions subject to snow and ice should not be superelevated too sharply, because the presence of these adverse conditions causes motorists to drive slower, and side friction is greatly reduced. Consequently, vehicles tend to slide to the low side of the roadway. Terrain conditions are another factor. Flat areas tend to have relatively flat grades, and such conditions have little effect on superelevation and side friction factors. However, mountainous regions have steeper grades, which combine with superelevation rates to produce steeper cross slopes on the pavement than may be apparent to the designer. Rural and urban areas require different maximum superelevation rates, because urban areas are more frequently subjected to congestion and slower-moving traffic. Vehicles operating at significantly less than design speeds necessitate a flatter maximum rate. Given the above considerations, a range of maximum values has been adopted for use in design. A maximum rate of 0.12 or 0.10 may be used in flat areas not subject to ice or snow. Rural areas where these conditions exist usually have a maximum rate of 0.08. A maximum rate of 0.06 is recommended for urban high-speed roadways, 50 mi/h (80 km/h) or greater, while 0.04 is used on low-speed urban roadways and temporary roads. Various factors affect the side friction factors used in design. Among these are pavement texture, weather conditions, and tire condition. The upper limit of the side friction factor is when the tires begin to skid. Highway curves must be designed to avoid skidding conditions with a margin of safety. Side friction factors also vary with design speed. Higher speeds tend to have lower side friction factors. The result of various studies leads to the values listed in Table 2.6, which shows the side friction factors by design speed generally used in developing superelevation tables (Ref. 1). Taking into account the above limits on superelevation rates and side friction factors, and rewriting Eq. (2.1), it follows that for a given design speed and maximum superelevation rate, there exists a minimum radius of curvature that should be allowed for design purposes: V2 Rmin 15(e f)

(2.2)

To allow a lesser radius for the design speed would require the superelevation rate or the friction factor to be increased beyond the recommended limit.

88

CHAPTER TWO TABLE 2.6 Friction Factors for Design Speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h); Used in Developing Superelevation Tables Design speed, mi/h

Side friction factor f

20 30 40 50 55 60 65 70

0.27 0.20 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10

Source: Adapted from Ref. 1.

Highway design using U.S. Customary units defines horizontal curvature in terms of degree of curve as well as radius. Under this definition, the degree of curve is defined as the central angle of a 100-ft (30-m) arc using a fixed radius. This results in the following equation relating R (radius, ft) to D (degree of curve, degrees): 5729.6 D R

(2.3)

Substituting in Eq. (2.2) gives the maximum degree of curvature for a given design speed and maximum superelevation rate: 85,660(e f) Dmax V2

(2.4)

Before presenting the superelevation tables, one final consideration must be addressed. Because for any curve, superelevation and side friction combine to offset the effects of centrifugal force, the question arises how much superelevation should be provided for curves flatter than the “maximum” allowed for a given design speed. The following five methods have been used over the years (Ref. 1): Method 1. Superelevation and side friction are directly proportional to the degree of curve or the inverse of the radius. Method 2. Side friction is used to offset centrifugal force in direct proportion to the degree of curve, for curves up to the point where fmax is required. For sharper curves, fmax remains constant and e is increased in direct proportion to the increasing degree of curvature until emax is reached. Method 3. Superelevation is used to offset centrifugal force in direct proportion to the degree of curve for curves up to the point where emax is required. For sharper curves, emax remains constant and f is increased in direct proportion to the increasing degree of curvature until fmax is reached. Method 4. Method 4 is similar to method 3, except that it is based on average running speed instead of design speed. Method 5. Superelevation and side friction are in a curvilinear relationship with the degree of curve (inverse of radius), with resulting values between those of method 1 and method 3.


89

Figure 2.8 shows a graphic comparison of the various methods. Method 5 is most commonly used on rural and high-speed [50 mi/h (80 km/h) or higher] urban highways. Method 2 is used on low-speed urban streets and temporary roadways. Recommended minimum radii for a given range of design speeds and incremental superelevation rates are given in Tables 2.7 through 2.11, where each table represents

DEGREE OF CURVE (or 1/R)



FIGURE 2.8 Methods of distributing superelevation and side friction. (a) Superelevation. (b) Corresponding friction factor at design speed. (c) Corresponding friction factor at running speed. (From A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2004, with permission)

90

1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0

1410 902 723 513 388 308 251 209 175 147 122 86

2050 1340 1110 838 650 524 433 363 307 259 215 154

2830 1880 1580 1270 1000 817 681 576 490 416 348 250

3730 2490 2120 1760 1420 1170 982 835 714 610 512 371

4770 3220 2760 2340 1930 1620 1370 1180 1010 865 730 533

5930 4040 3480 2980 2490 2100 1800 1550 1340 1150 970 711

7220 4940 4280 3690 3130 2660 2290 1980 1720 1480 1260 926

Vd 30 mi/h Vd 35 mi/h Vd 40 mi/h Vd 45 mi/h Vd 50 mi/h R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) 8650 5950 5180 4500 3870 3310 2860 2490 2170 1880 1600 1190

10300 7080 6190 5410 4700 4060 3530 3090 2700 2350 2010 1500

Vd 55 mi/h Vd 60 mi/h R (ft) R (ft)

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. R radius of curve Vd design speed e rate of superelevation Note: Use of emax 4 percent should be limited to urban conditions. Source: A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2004, with permission.

796 506 399 271 201 157 127 105 88 73 61 42

e Vd 15 mi/h Vd 20 mi/h Vd 25 mi/h (%) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft)

TABLE 2.7 Minimum Radii for Design Speeds from 15 to 60 mi/h (24 to 97 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 4 Percent

91

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.8 Minimum Radii for Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 6 Percent

e Vd 15 mi/h Vd 20 mi/h Vd 25 mi/h Vd 30 mi/h Vd 35 mi/h Vd 40 mi/h Vd 45 mi/h (%) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

868 614 543 482 430 384 341 300 256 209 176 151 131 116 102 91 82 73 65 58 51 39

1580 1120 991 884 791 709 635 566 498 422 358 309 270 238 212 189 169 152 136 121 106 81

2290 1630 1450 1300 1170 1050 944 850 761 673 583 511 452 402 360 324 292 264 237 212 186 144

3130 2240 2000 1790 1610 1460 1320 1200 1080 972 864 766 684 615 555 502 456 413 373 335 296 231

4100 2950 2630 2360 2130 1930 1760 1600 1460 1320 1190 1070 960 868 788 718 654 595 540 487 431 340

5230 3770 3370 3030 2740 2490 2270 2080 1900 1740 1590 1440 1310 1190 1090 995 911 833 759 687 611 485

6480 4680 4190 3770 3420 3110 2840 2600 2390 2190 2010 1840 1680 1540 1410 1300 1190 1090 995 903 806 643

(Continued)

92

CHAPTER TWO

TABLE 2.8 Minimum Radii for Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 6 Percent (Continued) e Vd 50 mi/h Vd 55 mi/h Vd 60 mi/h Vd 65 mi/h Vd 70 mi/h Vd 75 mi/h Vd 80 mi/h (%) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0

7870 5700 5100 4600 4170 3800 3480 3200 2940 2710 2490 2300

9410 6820 6110 5520 5020 4580 4200 3860 3560 3290 3040 2810

11100 8060 7230 6540 5950 5440 4990 4600 4250 3940 3650 3390

12600 9130 8200 7430 6770 6200 5710 5280 4890 4540 4230 3950

14100 10300 9240 8380 7660 7030 6490 6010 5580 5210 4860 4550

15700 11500 10400 9420 8620 7930 7330 6810 6340 5930 5560 5220

17400 12900 11600 10600 9670 8910 8260 7680 7180 6720 6320 5950

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

2110 1940 1780 1640 1510 1390 1280 1160 1040 833

2590 2400 2210 2050 1890 1750 1610 1470 1320 1060

3140 2920 2710 2510 2330 2160 1990 1830 1650 1330

3680 3440 3220 3000 2800 2610 2420 2230 2020 1660

4270 4010 3770 3550 3330 3120 2910 2700 2460 2040

4910 4630 4380 4140 3910 3690 3460 3230 2970 2500

5620 5320 5040 4790 4550 4320 4090 3840 3560 3050

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. R radius of curve Vd design speed e rate of superelevation Source: A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2004, with permission.

93


e Vd 15 mi/h Vd 20 mi/h Vd 25 mi/h Vd 30 mi/h Vd 35 mi/h Vd 40 mi/h Vd 45 mi/h (%) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0

932 676 605 546 496 453 415 382 352 324 300 277

1640 1190 1070 959 872 796 730 672 620 572 530 490

2370 1720 1550 1400 1280 1170 1070 985 911 845 784 729

3240 2370 2130 1930 1760 1610 1480 1370 1270 1180 1100 1030

4260 3120 2800 2540 2320 2130 1960 1820 1690 1570 1470 1370

5410 3970 3570 3240 2960 2720 2510 2330 2170 2020 1890 1770

6710 4930 4440 4030 3690 3390 3130 2900 2700 2520 2360 2220

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

255 235 215 193 172 154 139 126 115 105

453 418 384 349 314 284 258 236 216 199

678 630 585 542 499 457 420 387 358 332

955 893 834 779 727 676 627 582 542 506

1280 1200 1130 1060 991 929 870 813 761 713

1660 1560 1470 1390 1310 1230 1160 1090 1030 965

2080 1960 1850 1750 1650 1560 1480 1390 1320 1250

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

97 89 82 76 70 64 59 54 48 38

184 170 157 146 135 125 115 105 94 76

308 287 267 248 231 214 198 182 164 134

472 442 413 386 360 336 312 287 261 214

669 628 590 553 518 485 451 417 380 314

909 857 808 761 716 672 628 583 533 444

1180 1110 1050 990 933 878 822 765 701 587

(Continued)

94

CHAPTER TWO


8150 5990 5400 4910 4490 4130 3820 3550 3300 3090 2890 2720

9720 7150 6450 5870 5370 4950 4580 4250 3970 3710 3480 3270

11500 8440 7620 6930 6350 5850 5420 5040 4700 4400 4140 3890

12900 9510 8600 7830 7180 6630 6140 5720 5350 5010 4710 4450

14500 10700 9660 8810 8090 7470 6930 6460 6050 5680 5350 5050

16100 12000 10800 9850 9050 8370 7780 7260 6800 6400 6030 5710

17800 13300 12000 11000 10100 9340 8700 8130 7620 7180 6780 6420

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

2560 2410 2280 2160 2040 1930 1830 1740 1650 1560

3080 2910 2750 2610 2470 2350 2230 2120 2010 1920

3670 3470 3290 3120 2960 2820 2680 2550 2430 2320

4200 3980 3770 3590 3410 3250 3110 2970 2840 2710

4780 4540 4310 4100 3910 3740 3570 3420 3280 3150

5410 5140 4890 4670 4460 4260 4090 3920 3760 3620

6090 5800 5530 5280 5050 4840 4640 4460 4290 4140

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

1480 1400 1330 1260 1190 1120 1060 980 901 758

1820 1730 1650 1560 1480 1400 1320 1230 1140 960

2210 2110 2010 1910 1820 1720 1630 1530 1410 1200

2600 2490 2380 2280 2180 2070 1970 1850 1720 1480

3020 2910 2790 2690 2580 2470 2350 2230 2090 1810

3480 3360 3240 3120 3010 2900 2780 2650 2500 2210

3990 3850 3720 3600 3480 3370 3250 3120 2970 2670


95



947 694 625 567 517 475 438 406 377 352 329 308

1680 1230 1110 1010 916 841 777 720 670 625 584 547

2420 1780 1600 1460 1330 1230 1140 1050 978 913 856 804

3320 2440 2200 2000 1840 1690 1570 1450 1360 1270 1190 1120

4350 3210 2900 2640 2420 2230 2060 1920 1790 1680 1580 1490

5520 4080 3680 3350 3080 2840 2630 2450 2290 2150 2020 1900

6830 5050 4570 4160 3820 3520 3270 3040 2850 2670 2510 2370

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

289 271 255 240 226 213 200 188 176 164

514 483 455 429 404 381 359 339 319 299

756 713 673 636 601 569 539 511 484 458

1060 994 940 890 844 802 762 724 689 656

1400 1330 1260 1190 1130 1080 1030 974 929 886

1800 1700 1610 1530 1460 1390 1330 1270 1210 1160

2240 2120 2020 1920 1830 1740 1660 1590 1520 1460

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

152 140 130 120 112 105 98 92 86 81

280 260 242 226 212 199 187 176 165 156

433 409 386 363 343 324 306 290 274 260

624 594 564 536 509 483 460 437 416 396

846 808 772 737 704 671 641 612 585 558

1110 1060 1020 971 931 892 855 820 786 754

1400 1340 1290 1230 1190 1140 1100 1050 1010 968

8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10.0

76 72 68 64 60 56 52 48 44 36

147 139 131 124 116 109 102 95 87 72

246 234 221 209 198 186 175 163 150 126

377 359 341 324 307 291 274 256 236 200

533 509 486 463 440 418 395 370 343 292

722 692 662 633 604 574 545 513 477 410

930 893 856 820 784 748 710 671 625 540

(Continued)

96

CHAPTER TWO


8280 6130 5540 5050 4640 4280 3970 3700 3470 3250 3060 2890

9890 7330 6630 6050 5550 5130 4760 4440 4160 3900 3680 3470

11700 8630 7810 7130 6550 6050 5620 5250 4910 4620 4350 4110

13100 9720 8800 8040 7390 6840 6360 5930 5560 5230 4940 4670

14700 10900 9860 9010 8290 7680 7140 6680 6260 5900 5570 5270

16300 12200 11000 10100 9260 8580 7990 7480 7020 6620 6260 5930

18000 13500 12200 11200 10300 9550 8900 8330 7830 7390 6990 6630

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

2740 2590 2460 2340 2240 2130 2040 1950 1870 1790

3290 3120 2970 2830 2700 2580 2460 2360 2260 2170

3900 3700 3520 3360 3200 3060 2930 2810 2700 2590

4430 4210 4010 3830 3660 3500 3360 3220 3090 2980

5010 4760 4540 4340 4150 3980 3820 3670 3530 3400

5630 5370 5120 4900 4690 4500 4320 4160 4000 3860

6300 6010 5740 5490 5270 5060 4860 4680 4510 4360

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

1720 1650 1590 1530 1470 1410 1360 1310 1260 1220

2090 2010 1930 1860 1790 1730 1670 1610 1550 1500

2490 2400 2310 2230 2150 2070 2000 1940 1870 1810

2870 2760 2670 2570 2490 2410 2330 2250 2180 2120

3280 3160 3060 2960 2860 2770 2680 2600 2530 2450

3730 3600 3480 3370 3270 3170 3070 2990 2900 2820

4210 4070 3940 3820 3710 3600 3500 3400 3310 3220

8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10.0

1170 1130 1080 1040 992 948 903 854 798 694

1440 1390 1340 1290 1240 1190 1130 1080 1010 877

1750 1690 1630 1570 1520 1460 1390 1320 1250 1090

2050 1990 1930 1870 1810 1740 1670 1600 1510 1340

2380 2320 2250 2190 2130 2060 1990 1910 1820 1630

2750 2670 2600 2540 2470 2410 2340 2260 2160 1970

3140 3060 2980 2910 2840 2770 2710 2640 2550 2370

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. R radius of curve Vd design speed e rate of Superelevation Source: A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2004, with permission.

97



950 700 631 574 526 484 448 417 389 364 341 321

1690 1250 1130 1030 936 863 799 743 693 649 610 574

2460 1820 1640 1500 1370 1270 1170 1090 1020 953 896 845

3370 2490 2250 2060 1890 1740 1620 1510 1410 1320 1250 1180

4390 3260 2950 2690 2470 2280 2120 1970 1850 1730 1630 1540

5580 4140 3750 3420 3140 2910 2700 2520 2360 2220 2090 1980

6910 5130 4640 4240 3900 3600 3350 3130 2930 2750 2600 2460

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

303 286 271 257 243 231 220 209 199 190

542 512 485 460 437 415 395 377 359 343

798 756 717 681 648 618 589 563 538 514

1110 1050 997 948 904 862 824 788 754 723

1460 1390 1320 1260 1200 1140 1090 1050 1000 960

1870 1780 1690 1610 1540 1470 1410 1350 1300 1250

2330 2210 2110 2010 1920 1840 1760 1690 1620 1560

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

181 172 164 156 148 140 133 125 118 111

327 312 298 284 271 258 246 234 222 210

492 471 452 433 415 398 382 366 351 336

694 666 639 615 591 568 547 527 507 488

922 886 852 820 790 762 734 708 684 660

1200 1150 1110 1070 1030 994 960 928 897 868

1500 1440 1390 1340 1300 1250 1210 1170 1130 1100

(Continued)

98

CHAPTER TWO

TABLE 2.11 Minimum Radii for Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 12 Percent (Continued) e Vd 15 mi/h Vd 20 mi/h Vd 25 mi/h Vd 30 mi/h Vd 35 mi/h Vd 40 mi/h Vd 45 mi/h (%) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10.0

105 100 95 90 85 81 77 74 70 67

199 190 180 172 164 156 149 142 136 130

321 307 294 281 270 259 248 238 228 219

470 452 435 418 403 388 373 359 346 333

637 615 594 574 554 535 516 499 481 465

840 813 787 762 738 715 693 671 650 629

1070 1030 997 967 938 910 883 857 832 806

10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11.0 11.2 11.4 11.6 11.8 12.0

64 61 58 55 52 49 47 44 40 34

124 118 113 108 102 97 92 86 80 68

210 201 192 184 175 167 158 149 139 119

320 308 296 284 272 259 247 233 218 188

448 432 416 400 384 368 351 333 312 272

608 588 568 548 527 506 485 461 434 381

781 757 732 707 682 656 629 600 566 500

(Continued)

99

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.11 Minimum Radii for Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 12 Percent (Continued)


8370 6220 5640 5150 4730 4380 4070 3800 3560 3350 3160 2990

9990 7430 6730 6150 5660 5240 4870 4550 4270 4020 3790 3590

11800 8740 7930 7240 6670 6170 5740 5370 5030 4740 4470 4240

13200 9840 8920 8160 7510 6960 6480 6060 5690 5360 5060 4800

14800 11000 9980 9130 8420 7800 7270 6800 6390 6020 5700 5400

16400 12300 11200 10200 9380 8700 8110 7600 7140 6740 6380 6050

18100 13600 12400 11300 10500 9660 9010 8440 7940 7500 7100 6740

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

2840 2700 2570 2450 2340 2240 2150 2060 1980 1910

3400 3240 3080 2940 2810 2700 2590 2480 2390 2300

4020 3830 3650 3480 3330 3190 3060 2940 2830 2730

4560 4340 4140 3960 3790 3630 3490 3360 3230 3110

5130 4890 4670 4470 4280 4110 3950 3800 3660 3530

5750 5490 5240 5020 4810 4620 4440 4280 4130 3990

6420 6120 5850 5610 5380 5170 4980 4800 4630 4470

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

1840 1770 1710 1650 1590 1540 1490 1440 1400 1360

2210 2140 2060 1990 1930 1860 1810 1750 1700 1650

2630 2540 2450 2370 2290 2220 2150 2090 2020 1970

3010 2900 2810 2720 2630 2550 2470 2400 2330 2270

3410 3300 3190 3090 3000 2910 2820 2740 2670 2600

3850 3730 3610 3500 3400 3300 3200 3120 3030 2950

4330 4190 4060 3940 3820 3720 3610 3520 3430 3340

(Continued)

100

CHAPTER TWO

TABLE 2.11 Minimum Radii for Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 12 Percent (Continued) e Vd 50 mi/h Vd 55 mi/h Vd 60 mi/h Vd 65 mi/h Vd 70 mi/h Vd 75 mi/h Vd 80 mi/h (%) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) R (ft) 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10.0

1320 1280 1240 1200 1170 1140 1100 1070 1040 1010

1600 1550 1510 1470 1430 1390 1350 1310 1280 1250

1910 1860 1810 1760 1710 1660 1620 1580 1540 1500

2210 2150 2090 2040 1980 1940 1890 1840 1800 1760

2530 2460 2400 2340 2280 2230 2180 2130 2080 2030

2880 2800 2740 2670 2610 2550 2490 2440 2380 2330

3260 3180 3100 3030 2960 2890 2830 2770 2710 2660

10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11.0 11.2 11.4 11.6 11.8 12.0

980 951 922 892 862 831 799 763 722 641

1210 1180 1140 1110 1070 1040 995 953 904 807

1460 1430 1390 1350 1310 1270 1220 1170 1120 1000

1720 1680 1640 1600 1560 1510 1470 1410 1350 1220

1990 1940 1900 1860 1820 1780 1730 1680 1620 1480

2280 2240 2190 2150 2110 2070 2020 1970 1910 1790

2600 2550 2500 2460 2410 2370 2320 2280 2230 2130



101

a different maximum superelevation rate. Table 2.7 shows values for a maximum rate of 0.04; Table 2.8, for 0.06; Table 2.9, for 0.08; Table 2.10, for 0.10; and Table 2.11, for 0.12. Method 5 was used to calculate the minimum radius for each superelevation rate less than the maximum rate in each design speed column in the tables. The superelevation rates on low-speed urban streets are set using method 2 described above, in which side friction is used to offset the effect of centrifugal force up to the maximum friction value allowed for the design speed. Superelevation is then introduced for sharper curves. The design data in Table 2.12, based on method 2 and a maximum superelevation rate of 0.04, can be used for low-speed urban streets and temporary roads. The design data in Table 2.13 can be used for a wider range of design speeds and superelevation rates. In attempting to apply the recommended superelevation rates for low-speed urban roadways, various factors may combine to make these rates impractical to obtain. These factors include wide pavements, adjacent development, drainage conditions, and frequent access points. In such cases, curves may be designed with reduced or no superelevation, although crown removal is the recommended minimum. Effect of Grades on Superelevation. On long and fairly steep grades, drivers tend to travel somewhat slower in the upgrade direction and somewhat faster in the downgrade direction than on level roadways. In the case of divided highways, where each pavement can be superelevated independently, or on one-way roadways such as ramps, this tendency should be recognized to see whether some adjustment in the superelevation rate would be desirable and/or feasible. On grades of 4 percent or greater with a length of 1000 ft (305 m) or more and a superelevation rate of 0.06 or more, the designer may adjust the superelevation rate by assuming a design speed 5 mi/h (8 km/h) less in the upgrade direction and 5 mi/h (8 km/h) greater in the downgrade direction, provided that the assumed design speed is not less than the legal speed. On two-lane, two-way roadways and on other multilane undivided highways, such adjustments are less feasible, and should be disregarded. Superelevation Methods. There are three basic methods for developing superelevation on a crowned pavement leading into and coming out of a horizontal curve. Figure 2.9 shows each method. In the most commonly used method, case I, the pavement edges are revolved about the centerline. Thus, the inner edge of the pavement is depressed by half of the superelevation and the outer edge raised by the same amount. Case II shows the pavement revolved about the inner or lower edge of pavement, and case III shows the pavement revolved about the outer or higher edge of pavement. Case II can be used where off-road drainage is a problem and lowering the inner pavement edge cannot be accommodated. The superelevation on divided roadways is achieved by revolving the pavements about the median pavement edge. In this way, the outside (high side) roadway uses case II, while the inside (low side) roadway uses case III. This helps control the amount of “distortion” in grading the median area. Superelevation Transition. The length of highway needed to change from a normal crowned section to a fully superelevated section is referred to as the superelevation transition. This length is shown as X in Fig. 2.9, which also shows the various other elements described below. The superelevation transition is divided into two parts: the tangent runout, and the superelevation runoff. The tangent runout (T in Fig. 2.9) is the length required to remove the adverse pavement cross slope. As is shown for case I of Fig. 2.9, this is the length required to raise the outside edge of pavement from a normal cross slope to a half-flat section. The superelevation runoff (L in Fig. 2.9) is the length required to raise the outside

102

CHAPTER TWO

TABLE 2.12 Superelevation Rates and Runoff Lengths (ft) for Horizontal Curves on Low-Speed Urban Streets Based on a Maximum Superelevation Rate of 4 Percent Design speed, mi/h 20

25

30

35

40

45

Dc

Radius, ft

ed

Lr

ed

Lr

ed

Lr

ed

Lr

ed

Lr

ed

Lr

5°00 5°30 6°00 7°00 7°30 8°00 9°00 9°30 10°00 10°30 11°00 11°30 12°00 13°00 14°00 15°00 15°30 17°00 17°30 18°00 20°00 20°30 21°00 22°00 22°45 25°00 29°00 29°30 30°00 33°00 33°45 35°00 36°00 37°00 40°00 50°00 54°30 56°00 58°00 61°00 61°15 62°00 63°00 64°00 65°00 66°00 66°30

1146 1042 955 819 764 716 637 603 573 546 521 498 458 441 409 382 370 337 327 318 286 279 273 260 252 229 198 194 191 174 170 164 159 155 143 116 105 102 99 94 93 92 91 90 88 87 86

NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC RC RC RC RC .016 .020 .024 .029 .034 .038 .040

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 26 26 26 26 26 32 39 47 55 62 65

NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC RC RC RC .016 .025 .033 .040

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 28 28 28 28 43 57 69

NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC RC RC .016 .021 .031 .039

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 30 30 30 39 57 72

NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC RC RC RC .020 .035 .040

— — — — — — — — — — — 31 31 31 39 68 78

NC NC NC NC NC RC RC .017 .027 .036

— — — — — 33 33 35 56 75

NC NC RC .016 .027 .039

— — 36 36 60 87

8°00 5°40

10°45 7°42

15°30 11°28

22°45 17°30

37°00 29°20

66°30 54°23

NC Normal crown RC Remove crown ed Design superelevation rate Lr minimum runoff length, 12-foot wide Lane rotated about the centerline Maximum degree of curve for the design speed Maximum degree of curve for normal crown


TABLE 2.13 Runoff Lengths (ft) for Horizontal Curves with Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 12 Percent Based on One Lane Rotated about the Centerline e Vd 15 mi/h Vd 20 mi/h Vd 25 mi/h Vd 30 mi/h Vd 35 mi/h Vd 40 mi/h Vd 45 mi/h (%) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0

0 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 62

0 32 36 39 42 45 49 52 55 58 62 65

0 34 38 41 45 48 51 55 58 62 65 69

0 36 40 44 47 51 55 58 62 65 69 73

0 39 43 46 50 54 58 62 66 70 74 77

0 41 46 50 54 58 62 66 70 74 79 83

0 44 49 53 58 62 67 71 76 80 84 89

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

65 68 71 74 77 80 83 86 89 92

68 71 75 78 81 84 88 91 94 97

72 75 79 82 86 89 93 96 99 103

76 80 84 87 91 95 98 102 105 109

81 85 89 93 97 101 105 108 112 116

87 91 95 99 103 108 112 116 120 124

93 98 102 107 111 116 120 124 129 133

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

95 98 102 105 108 111 114 117 120 123

101 104 107 110 114 117 120 123 126 130

106 110 113 117 120 123 127 130 134 137

113 116 120 124 127 131 135 138 142 145

120 124 128 132 135 139 143 147 151 155

128 132 137 141 145 149 153 157 161 166

138 142 147 151 156 160 164 169 173 178

8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10.0

126 129 132 135 138 142 145 148 151 154

133 136 139 143 146 149 152 156 159 162

141 144 147 151 154 158 161 165 168 171

149 153 156 160 164 167 171 175 178 182

159 163 166 170 174 178 182 186 190 194

170 174 178 182 186 190 194 199 203 207

182 187 191 196 200 204 209 213 218 222

10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11.0 11.2 11.4 11.6 11.8 12.0

157 160 163 166 169 172 175 178 182 185

165 169 172 175 178 182 185 188 191 195

175 178 182 185 189 192 195 199 202 206

185 189 193 196 200 204 207 211 215 218

197 201 205 209 213 217 221 225 228 232

211 215 219 223 228 232 236 240 244 248

227 231 236 240 244 249 253 258 262 267

(Continued)

TABLE 2.13 Runoff Lengths (ft) for Horizontal Curves with Design Speeds from 15 to 80 mi/h (24 to 129 km/h) and Superelevation Rates to 12 Percent Based on One Lane Rotated about the Centerline (Continued) e Vd 50 mi/h Vd 55 mi/h Vd 60 mi/h Vd 65 mi/h Vd 70 mi/h Vd 75 mi/h Vd 80 mi/h (%) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) Lr (ft) 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0

0 48 53 58 62 67 72 77 82 86 91 96

0 51 56 61 66 71 77 82 87 92 97 102

0 53 59 64 69 75 80 85 91 96 101 107

0 56 61 67 73 78 84 89 95 100 106 112

0 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120

0 63 69 76 82 88 95 101 107 114 120 126

0 69 75 82 89 96 103 110 117 123 130 137

4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0

101 106 110 115 120 125 130 134 139 144

107 112 117 123 128 133 138 143 148 153

112 117 123 128 133 139 144 149 155 160

117 123 128 134 140 145 151 156 162 167

126 132 138 144 150 156 162 168 174 180

133 139 145 152 158 164 171 177 183 189

144 151 158 165 171 178 185 192 199 206

6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0

149 154 158 163 168 173 178 182 187 192

158 163 169 174 179 184 189 194 199 204

165 171 176 181 187 192 197 203 208 213

173 179 184 190 195 201 207 212 218 223

186 192 198 204 210 216 222 228 234 240

196 202 208 215 221 227 234 240 246 253

213 219 226 233 240 247 254 261 267 274

8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9.0 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.8 10.0

197 202 206 211 216 221 226 230 235 240

209 214 220 225 230 235 240 245 250 255

219 224 229 235 240 245 251 256 261 267

229 234 240 246 251 257 262 268 273 279

246 252 258 264 270 276 282 288 294 300

259 265 272 278 284 291 297 303 309 316

281 288 295 302 309 315 322 329 336 343

10.2 10.4 10.6 10.8 11.0 11.2 11.4 11.6 11.8 12.07

245 250 254 259 264 269 274 278 283 288

260 266 271 276 281 286 291 296 301 306

272 277 283 288 293 299 304 309 315 320

285 290 296 301 307 313 318 324 329 335

306 312 318 324 330 336 342 348 354 360

322 328 335 341 347 354 360 366 373 379

350 357 363 370 377 384 391 398 405 411

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Source: A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2004, with permission.


105

FIGURE 2.9 Superelevation transition between tangent and simple or spiral curves for three cases. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

edge of pavement from a half-flat section to a fully superelevated section. The length of transition required to remove the pavement crown (R in Fig. 2.9) is generally equal to twice the T distance. The minimum superelevation transition length X should be equal in feet to 3 times the design speed in miles per hour. This includes the tangent runout (T) as previously described. The reason to specify this minimum is to avoid the appearance of a “kink” in

106

CHAPTER TWO

the roadway that a shorter transition would provide. The distance is approximately equal to that traveled by a vehicle in 2 s at design speed. This requirement does not apply to low-speed roadways, temporary roads, superelevation transitions near intersections, or transitions between adjacent horizontal curves (reverse or same direction) where normal transitions would overlap each other. In these cases, the minimum transition length is determined by multiplying the edge of pavement correction by the equivalent slope rate (G) shown in Table 2.14. The rate of change of superelevation should be constant throughout the transition X. Some agencies use a flatter rate of transition through the T or R sections than that recommended in Table 2.14, an acceptable but unnecessary practice. The values given for Lr in Tables 2.12 and 2.13 are based on one 12-ft (3.66-m) lane revolved about the centerline. Table 2.14 shows methods of calculating L when more lanes are revolved about the centerline. In the equations in Table 2.14, L is substituted for Lr. In addition to the terms described in Fig. 2.9, two additional ones are used. W is the width from the point of revolution to the outside edge of pavement. For example, if three 12-ft (3.66-m) lanes are revolved about the lane edge between lanes 2 and 3, then W 3 12 36 ft (11 m); the wider section of pavement is used for the width. B is an adjustment factor for multilane pavements to allow for some reduction in the superelevation transition for roads other than interstates, freeways, expressways, and ramps. Section (a) in Table 2.14 lists the equivalent slope rate values G for the various design speeds. Section (b) provides the multilane adjustments factors B for the speeds. Section (c) calculates the value of the overall transition length X based on the values given in (a) and (b) along with a given W and S for each case in Fig. 2.9. Finally, section (d) tests the values calculated to ensure that the minimum transition length discussed in this section is provided. Values for X, L, and T can be lengthened if necessary to achieve a 2-s transition time. Superelevation Position. Figure 2.9 shows the recommended positioning of the proposed superelevation transition in relationship to the horizontal curve. For those curves with spirals, the transition from adverse crown removal to full superelevation should occur within the limits of the spiral. In other words, the spiral length should equal the L value, usually rounded to the nearest 25 ft (7.6 m). For simple curves without spirals, the L transition should be placed so that 50 to 70 percent of the maximum superelevation rate is outside the curve limits (point of curvature PC to point of tangency PT). It is recommended that whenever possible, two-thirds of the full superelevation rate be present at the PC and PT. See the case diagrams in Fig. 2.9 for a graphic presentation of the recommended positioning. Profiles and Elevations. Breakpoints at the beginning and end of the superelevation transition should be rounded to obtain a smooth profile. One suggestion is to use a “vertical curve” on the edge of the pavement profile with a length in feet equal to the design speed in mi/h (i.e., 45 ft for 45 mi/h). The final construction plans should have the superelevation tables or pavement details showing the proposed elevations at the centerline, pavement edges, and, if applicable, lane lines or other breaks in the cross slopes. Pavement or lane widths should be included where these widths are in transition. Pavement edge profiles should be plotted to an exaggerated vertical profile within the limits of the superelevation transitions to check calculations and to determine the location of drainage basins. Adjustments should be made to obtain smooth profiles. Special care should be taken in determining edge elevations in a transition area when the profile grade is on a vertical curve. Superelevation between Reverse Horizontal Curves. When two horizontal curves are in close proximity to each other, the superelevation transitions calculated independently

TABLE 2.14 Superelevation Notes for Adjusting Runoff Lengths in Tables 2.12 and 2.13 (a) Maximum relative gradients for profiles between the edge of pavement and the centerline or reference line Design speed, mi/h

Relative gradient

Equivalent slope rate, G

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

0.74 0.70 0.66 0.62 0.58 0.54 0.50 0.47 0.45 0.43 0.40

135:1 143:1 152:1 161:1 172:1 185:1 200:1 213:1 222:1 233:1 250:1

(b) Transition length adjustment factors for wide pavements Number of lanes from point of rotation

B for interstates, freeways, expressways, and ramps

B for other roadways

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

1.00 0.83 0.75 0.70 0.67 0.64

(c) Calculate X, L, T Case I

Cases II and III

X BW(S N)G L BWSG T BWNG

X BWSG L BW(S – N/2)G T BW(N/2)G

(d) Check for 2-second minimum transition (Note: D is the linear ft equivalent of the design speed in mi/h. For example, D 60 ft for 60 mi/h) If X > 3D, then the values for X, L, and T from section (c) are valid. If X < 3D, then recalculate X, L, and T as follows: Case I X 3D L 3D[S/(N S)] T 3D[N/(N S)]

Cases II and III X 3D L 3D[(2S – N)/2S] T 3D(N/2S)

Conversion: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h. General notes: 1. The Lr in Tables 2.12 and 2.13 is the same as L in Table 2.14 and is based on a two-lane 24-ft pavement revolved about the centerline. 2. Adjustments to L for varying two-lane pavement widths can be made by direct proportion. For a 20-ft pavement revolved about the centerline, L L(20/24). 3. Determination of X, L, and T when more than one lane is revolved about the centerline (or other reference line, such as a baseline or edge of pavement) is shown in part (c). Values for G and B in the formulas are given in parts (a) and (b), respectively. The value for W is the pavement width from the point of rotation to the farthest edge. 4. The minimum length of superelevation transition (X) as discussed in the text is the distance traveled in 2 s. This number can be rounded off to a figure in feet equal to 3 times the design speed. In part (d) the calculated X value is compared to the value of 3D, where D is the linear feet equivalent of the design speed in miles per hour. If the value of 3D is larger, X is set equal to this value and L and T are adjusted accordingly. 5. The L value is also the recommended spiral length where spirals are used. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

108

CHAPTER TWO

may overlap each other. In these cases, the designer should coordinate the transitions to provide a smooth and uniform change from the full superelevation of the first curve to the full superelevation of the second curve. Figure 2.10 shows two diagrams suggesting ways in which this may be accomplished. In both diagrams each curve has its own L value (L1, L2) depending on the degree of curvature, and the superelevation is revolved about the centerline.

FIGURE 2.10 Superelevation transition between reverse horizontal curves, simple or spiral. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)


109

The top diagram involves two simple curves. In the case of new or relocated alignment, the PT of the first curve and the PC of the second curve should be separated by enough distance to allow a smooth, continuous transition between the curves at a rate not exceeding the G value for the design speed (Table 2.14). This requires that the distance be not less than 50 percent nor greater than 70 percent of L1 L2. Two-thirds is the recommended portion. When adapting this procedure to existing curves where no alignment revision is proposed, the transition should conform as closely as possible to the above criteria. When the available distance between the curves is less than 50 percent of L1 L2, the transition rate may be increased and/or the superelevation rate at the PT or PC may be set to less than 50 percent of the full superelevation rate. The lower diagram involves two spiral curves. Where spiral transitions are used, the spiral-to-tangent (ST) point of the first curve and the tangent-to-spiral (TS) transition of the second curve may be at, or nearly at, the same location, without causing superelevation problems. In these cases, the crown should not be reestablished as shown in Fig. 2.9, but instead, both pavement edges should be in continual transition between the curves, as shown in the lower diagram of Fig. 2.10. The total superelevation transition length is the distance between the curve-to-spiral (CS) point of the first curve and spiral-to-curve (SC) point of the second curve. Spiral Transitions. When a motor vehicle enters or leaves a circular horizontal curve, it follows a transition path during which the driver makes adjustments in steering to account for the gain or loss in centrifugal force. For most curves, the average driver can negotiate this change in steering within the normal width of the travel lane. However, combinations of higher speeds and sharper curvature may cause the driver to move into an adjacent travel lane while accomplishing the change. To prevent this occurrence, the designer should use spirals to smooth out transitions. There are several advantages to using spiral transitions for horizontal curves: ● ● ●

●

They provide an easy-to-follow path for the driver to negotiate. They provide a convenient area in which to place the superelevation transition. They provide an area where the pavement width can be transitioned when required for curve widening. They provide a smoother appearance to the driver.

The Euler spiral is the one most commonly used in highway design. The degree of curve varies gradually from zero at the tangent end to the degree of the circular arc at the curve end. By definition, the degree of curve at any point along the spiral varies directly with the length measured along the spiral. In the case where a spiral transition connects two simple curves, the degree of curve varies directly from that of the first circular arc to that of the second circular arc. As a general guideline, spirals should be used on roadways where the design speed is 50 mi/h (80 km/h) or greater and the degree of curvature exceeds the values given in Table 2.15 for various design speeds listed. Horizontal Alignment Considerations. The following items should be considered when establishing new horizontal alignment: ●

● ● ●

The alignment should be as directional as possible while still consistent with topography and the preservation of developed properties and community values. Maximum allowable curvature should be avoided whenever possible. Consistent alignment should be sought. Curves should be long enough to avoid the appearance of a kink.

110

CHAPTER TWO TABLE 2.15 Maximum Curve without a Spiral Design speed, mi/h

Design speed, km/h

Max. degree of curve

Min. radius, ft

Min. radius, m

50 55 60 65 70

80 88 96 105 113

4º30 3º45 3º00 2º30 2º15

1273 1528 1910 2292 2546

388 466 582 699 776

Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

● ● ● ●

Tangents and/or flat curves should be provided on high, long fills. Compound curves should be used only with caution. Abrupt alignment reversals should be avoided. Two curves in the same direction separated by a short tangent (broken-back or flatback curves) should be avoided.

2.2.4 Vertical Alignment The design of the vertical alignment of a roadway also has a direct effect on the safety and comfort of the driver. Steep grades can slow down large, heavy vehicles in the traffic stream in the uphill direction and can adversely affect stopping ability in the downhill direction. Grades that are flat or nearly flat over extended distances will slow down the rate at which the pavement surface drains. Vertical curves provide a smooth change between two tangent grades, but must be designed to provide adequate stopping sight distance. Tangent Grades. The maximum percent grade for a given roadway is determined by its functional classification, surrounding terrain, and design speed. Table 2.16 shows how the maximum grade can vary under different circumstances. Note that relatively flat grade limits are recommended for higher functional class roadways and at higher design speeds, whereas steeper grade limits are permitted for local roads and at lower design speeds. Concerning minimum grades, flat and level grades may be used on uncurbed roadways without objection, as long as the pavement is adequately crowned to drain the surface laterally. The preferred minimum grade for curbed pavements is 0.5 percent, but a grade of 0.3 percent may be used where there is a high-type pavement accurately crowned and supported on firm subgrade. Critical Length of Grade. Freedom and safety of movement on two-lane highways are adversely affected by heavily loaded vehicles operating on upgrades of sufficient lengths to result in speeds that could impede following vehicles. The term critical length of grade is defined as the length of a particular upgrade which reduces the operating speed of a truck with a weight-to-horsepower ratio of 200 lb/hp (0.122 kg/W) to 10 mi/h (1.6 km/h) below the operating speed of the remaining traffic. Figure 2.11 provides the amount of speed reduction for these trucks given a range of percent upgrades and length of grades. The entering speed is assumed to be 70 mi/h (113 km/h). The curve representing a 10-mi/h (1.6-km/h) reduction is the design guideline to be used in determining the critical length of grade.

111

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.16 Maximum Grades as Determined by Function, Terrain, and Speed, % Design speed, mi/h Functional classification Urban: Interstate,* other freeways, and expressways

Arterial street†

Collector streets†

Local streets†

Rural: Interstate,* other freeways, and expressways

Arterials†

Collectors†

Local roads†

Terrain

Level Rolling Hilly Level Rolling Hilly Level Rolling Hilly Level Rolling Hilly

Level Rolling Hilly Level Rolling Hilly Level Rolling Hilly Level Rolling Hilly

25

9 12 13 7 11 15

7 10 11 7 11 15

30

8 9 11 9 11 12 7 10 14

7 9 10 7 10 14

35

7 8 10 9 10 12 7 10 13

7 9 10 7 10 13

40

7 8 10 9 10 12 7 10 13

5 6 8 7 8 10 7 10 13

45

50

55

60

65

70

75–80

4 5 6 5 6 8 7 8 10 6 7 10

3 4 6 5 6 8 6 7 9 5 6

3 4 5

3 4 5

3 4

6 7 9 8 9 11 7 9 12

4 5 6 6 7 9 7 8 10 6 8 10

4 5 6 4 5 6 6 7 9 6 7 10

3 4 6 3 4 6 5 6 8 5 6

3 4 5 3 4 5

3 4 5 3 4 5

3 4

5 6 7 7 8 10 7 9 12

4 5 6 4 5 7 6 7 9 6 8 10

3 4 5

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. *Grades 1% steeper may be used for extreme cases where development in urban areas precludes the use of flatter grades. Grades 1% steeper may also be used for one-way down-grades except in hilly terrain. † Grades 1% steeper may be used for short lengths (less than 500 ft) and on one-way down-grades. For rural highways with current ADT less than 400, grades may be 2% steeper. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design. Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

If after an investigation of the project grade line, it is found that the critical length of grade must be exceeded, an analysis of the effect of the long grades on the level of service of the roadway should be made. Where speeds resulting from trucks climbing up long grades are calculated to fall within the range of service level D or lower, consideration should be given to constructing added uphill lanes on critical lengths of grade. Refer to the “Highway Capacity Manual” (Ref. 10) for methodology in determining level of service. Where the length of added lanes needed to preserve the recommended level of service on sections with long grades exceeds 10 percent of the total distance between major termini, consideration should be given to the ultimate construction of a divided multilane facility.

112

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.11 Critical lengths of grade based on typical heavy truck of 200 lb/hp (0.122 kg/W) at entering speed of 70 mi/h (113 km/h). Notes: (1) This graph can also be used to compute the critical length of grade for grade combinations. For example, find the critical length of grade for a 4 percent upgrade preceded by 2000 ft (610 m) of 2 percent upgrade and a tolerable speed reduction of 15 mi/h (24 km/h). From the graph, 2000 ft (610 m) of 2 percent upgrade results in a speed reduction of 7 mi/h (11 km/h). Subtracting 7 mi/h (11.2 km/h) from the tolerable speed reduction of 15 mi/h (24 km/h) gives the remaining tolerable speed reduction of 8 mi/h (12.8 km/h). The graph shows that the remaining tolerable speed reduction would occur on 1000 ft (305 m) of the 4 percent upgrade. (2) The critical length of grade is the length of tangent grade. When a vertical curve is part of the critical length of grade, an approximate equivalent tangent grade should be used. Where A ≤ 3 percent, the vertical tangent lengths can be used (VPI to VPI). Where A 3 percent, about 1/4 of the vertical curve length should be used as part of the tangent grade. Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Vertical Curves. A vertical curve is used to provide a smooth transition between vertical tangents of different grades. It is a parabolic curve and is usually centered on the intersection point of the vertical tangents. One of the principles of parabolic curves is that the rate of change of slope is a constant throughout the curve. For a vertical curve, this rate is equal to the length of the curve divided by the algebraic difference of the grades. This value is called the K value and represents the distance required for the vertical tangent to change by 1 percent. The K value is useful in design to determine the minimum length of vertical curve necessary to provide minimum stopping sight distance given two vertical grades. Allowable Grade Breaks. There are situations where it is not necessary to provide a vertical curve at the intersection of two vertical grades because the difference in grades is not large enough to provide any discomfort to the driver. The difference


113

TABLE 2.17 Maximum Change in Vertical Alignment Not Requiring a Vertical Curve Design speed, mi/h

Design speed, km/h

Maximum grade change, %*

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 105 113

1.85 1.30 0.95 0.75 0.55 0.45 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.25

Based on the following equation: 1162.5 46.5L A V2 V2 where A maximum grade change, % L length of vertical curve, ft; assume 25 V design speed, mi/h Note: The recommended minimum distance between consecutive deflections is 100 ft (30 m) where design speed 40 mi/h (64 km/h) and 50 ft (15 m) where design speed 40 mi/h. *Rounded to nearest 0.05%. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

varies with the design speed of the roadway. At 25 mi/h (40 km/h), a grade break of 1.85 percent without a curve may be permitted, while at 55 mi/h (88 km/h) the allowable difference is only 0.40 percent. Table 2.17 lists the maximum grade break permitted without using a vertical curve for various design speeds. The equation used to develop the distances is indicated as well as a recommended minimum distance between consecutive grade breaks. Where consecutive grade breaks occur within 100 ft (30 m) for design speeds over 40 mi/h (64 km/h), or within 50 ft (15 m) for design speeds at 40 mi/h (64 km/h) and under, this indicates that a vertical curve may be a better solution than not providing one. Crest Vertical Curves. The major design consideration for crest vertical curves is the provision of ample stopping sight distance for the design speed. Calculations of available stopping sight distance are based on the driver’s eye 3.5 ft (1.07 m) above the roadway surface with the ability to see an object 2 ft (0.61 m) high on the roadway ahead over the top of the pavement. Table 2.18 lists the calculated design stopping sight distance values and the corresponding K values for design speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h). The values shown are based on the assumption that the curve is longer than the sight distance. In those cases where the sight distance exceeds the vertical curve length, a different equation is used to calculate the stopping sight distance provided. The equations are shown in the table. Another consideration in designing crest vertical curves is passing sight distance, especially when dealing with two-lane roadways. This has already been discussed

114

CHAPTER TWO TABLE 2.18 Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) for Crest Vertical Curves at Design Speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h) Height of eye, 3.50 ft; height of object, 2.00 ft Design speed, mi/h

Design SSD, ft

Design K, ft/%

Design speed, mi/h

Design SSD, ft

Design K, ft/%

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

115 120 130 140 145 155 165 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 305 315 325 340 350 360

7 7 8 10 10 12 13 14 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 32 34 37 39 44 46 49 54 57 61

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

375 385 400 415 425 440 455 465 480 495 510 525 540 555 570 585 600 615 630 645 665 680 695 715 730

66 69 75 80 84 90 96 101 107 114 121 128 136 143 151 159 167 176 184 193 205 215 224 237 247

Using S stopping sight distance, ft L length of crest vertical curve, ft A algebraic difference in grades, %, absolute value K rate of vertical curvature, ft per % change ● For a given design speed and A value, the calculated length L KA. ● To determine S with a given L and A, use the following: For S L: S 46.45兹K 苶 where K L/A For S L: S 1079/A L/2 Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Note: For design criteria pertaining to collectors and local roads wih ADT less than 400, please refer to the AASHTO publication, Guidelines for Geometric Design of Very Low-Volume Local Roads (ADT ≤ 400). Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

under “Passing Sight Distance” earlier in this chapter. Also, in addition to being designed for safe stopping sight distance, crest vertical curves should be designed for comfortable operation and a pleasing appearance whenever possible. To accomplish this, the length of a crest curve in feet should be, as a minimum, 3 times the design speed in miles per hour.


115

Sag Vertical Curves. The main factor affecting the design of a sag vertical curve is headlight sight distance. When a vehicle traverses an unlighted sag vertical curve at night, the portion of highway lighted ahead is dependent on the position of the headlights and the direction of the light beam. For design purposes, the length of roadway lighted ahead is assumed to be the available stopping sight distance for the curve. In calculating the distances for a given set of grades and a length of curve, the height of the headlight is assumed to be 2 ft (0.61 m) and the upward divergence of the light beam is considered to be 1°. Table 2.19 lists the calculated design stopping sight distance values and the corresponding K values for design speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h). As was the case with crest curves, the values shown are based on the assumption that the curve is longer than the sight distance. In those cases where the sight distance exceeds the vertical curve length, a different equation is used to calculate the actual stopping sight distance provided as indicated in the table. Note for sag curves, when the algebraic difference of grades is 1.75 percent or less, stopping sight distance is not restricted by the curve. In these cases, the equations in Table 2.19 will not provide meaningful answers. Minimum lengths of sag vertical curves are necessary to provide a pleasing general appearance of the highway. To accomplish this, the minimum length of a sag curve in feet should be equal to 3 times the design speed in miles per hour. Vertical Alignment Considerations. The following items should be considered when establishing new vertical alignment: ●

● ●

●

●

●

The profile should be smooth with gradual changes consistent with the type of facility and the character of the surrounding terrain. A “roller-coaster” or “hidden dip” profile should be avoided. Undulating grade lines involving substantial lengths of steeper grades should be appraised for their effect on traffic operation, since they may encourage excessive truck speeds. Broken-back grade lines (two vertical curves—a pair of either crest curves or sag curves—separated by a short tangent grade) should generally be avoided. Special attention should be given to drainage on curbed roadways where vertical curves have a K value of 167 or greater, since these areas are very flat. It is preferable to avoid long, sustained grades by breaking them into shorter intervals with steeper grades at the bottom.

2.2.5 Coordination of Horizontal and Vertical Alignments When designing new roadway projects, the following items should be considered to coordinate the horizontal and vertical alignments: ●

●

●

Curvature and tangent sections should be properly balanced. Normally, horizontal curves will be longer than vertical curves. It is generally more pleasing to the driver when vertical curvature can be superimposed on horizontal curvature. In other words, the PIs (points of intersection) of both the vertical and horizontal curves should be near the same station or location. Sharp horizontal curves should not be introduced at or near the top of a pronounced crest vertical curve or at or near the low point of a pronounced sag vertical curve.

116

CHAPTER TWO TABLE 2.19 Stopping Sight Distance for Sag Vertical Curves at Design Speeds from 20 to 70 mi/h (32 to 113 km/h) Height of headlight 2.00 ft Upward light beam divergence 1°00ⴕ Design speed, mi/h

Design SSD, ft

Design K, ft/%

Design speed, mi/h

Design SSD, ft

Design K, ft/%

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

115 120 130 140 145 155 165 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 305 315 325 340 350 360

17 18 20 22 24 26 28 29 32 34 37 39 42 44 47 49 52 55 57 60 64 66 69 73 76 79

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70

375 385 400 415 425 440 455 465 480 495 510 525 540 555 570 585 600 615 630 645 665 680 695 715 730

83 85 89 93 96 100 104 107 111 115 119 123 128 132 136 140 144 148 153 157 162 167 171 176 181

Using S stopping sight distance, ft L length of sag vertical curve, ft A algebraic difference in grades, %, absolute value K rate of vertical curvature, ft per % change ● For a given design speed and A value, the calculated length L KA ● To determine S with a given L and A, use the following: For S L:

3.5L 兹1 苶2苶.2 苶5苶L 苶2苶苶苶6 1苶0苶0苶A 苶L 苶 S 2A

For S L:

S (AL 400)/(2A 3.5)

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Note: When the algebraic difference A is 1.75 percent or less, SSD is not restricted by the vertical curve. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

117

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC ●

● ●

●

●

On two-lane roadways, long tangent sections (horizontal and vertical) are desirable to provide adequate passing sections. Horizontal and vertical curves should be as flat as possible at intersections. On divided highways, the use of variable median widths and separate horizontal and vertical alignments should be considered. In urban areas, horizontal and vertical alignments should be designed to minimize nuisance factors. These might include directional adjustment to increase buffer zones and depressed roadways to decrease noise. Horizontal and vertical alignments may often be adjusted to enhance views of scenic areas.

2.3 CROSS-SECTION DESIGN This article provides information to assist the designer in determining lane widths, pavement cross slopes, shoulder widths, interchange cross-section elements, medians, curbs, pedestrian facilities, and grading and side slopes. The number of lanes for a given roadway facility is best determined using principles and procedures contained in the “Highway Capacity Manual” (Ref. 10). This manual analyzes roadways to determine an appropriate “level of service,” by which a letter value (A through F) is assigned depending on the volume of traffic and other geometric features. Table 2.20 provides a design guide for level of service for various facilities by functional classification and terrain or locale. The table includes a brief description of the characteristics of each level of service.

TABLE 2.20 Guide for Selecting Design Service Level As Determined by Function and Terrain or Locale Minimum level of service for area and terrain or locale Functional classification Interstate, other freeways, and expressways Arterial Collector Local

Rural Level

Rolling

Hilly

Urban and suburban

B

B

C

C

B C D

B C D

C D D

C D D

A: Free flow, with low volumes and high speeds. B: Stable flow, speeds beginning to be restricted by traffic conditions. C: In stable flow zone, but most drivers are restricted in freedom to select own speed. D: Approaching unstable flow; drivers have little freedom to maneuver. E: Unstable flow; short stoppages may occur. F: Forced or breakdown flow. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

118

CHAPTER TWO

2.3.1 Roadway Criteria Lane Widths and Transitions. When considering the physical characteristics of cross sections, the values selected will depend on location (rural or urban), speed, traffic volumes, functional classification, and, in urban areas, the type of adjacent development. Tables 2.21, 2.22, and 2.23 provide values currently used in Ohio. Lane width is dependent on design speed, especially in rural areas. Widths may be as narrow as 9 ft (2.74 m) for a local, low-volume road. In urban areas, lane widths can be as narrow as 10 ft (3.05 m), if the road is primarily a residential street. The maximum lane width is generally accepted to be 12 ft (3.66 m) in all locales. In some cases it may be necessary to widen the pavement on sharp curves to accommodate off-tracking of larger vehicles. Table 2.24 provides a chart of recommended pavement widening based on degree of curvature and design speed. These values are based on a WB-50 design vehicle. The widened portion of the pavement is normally placed on the inside of the curve. Where curves are introduced with spiral transitions, the widening occurs over the length of the spiral. On alignments without spirals, the widening is developed over the same distance that the superelevation transition occurs. The centerline pavement marking and the center joint (if applicable) should be placed equidistant from the pavement edges. See Fig. 2.12 for illustrations of curve widening. Whenever the driver’s lane is being shifted—for example, when lanes are being added or eliminated—the shifting rate should be controlled using the following equations: L WS

for design speeds over 40 mi/h

(2.5)

2

S L W 60

for design speeds up to 40 mi/h

(2.6)

where L approach taper length, ft W offset width, ft S design speed, mi/h Where lanes are being added but the driver is not being “forced” to follow the actual transition (such as in adding right turn lanes), the transition can occur in 50 ft (15 m) on most roadways or 100 ft (30 m) on freeway designs. Pavement Cross Slopes. Roadways on tangent or relatively straight alignments where no superelevation is required are normally crowned (peaked) in the middle. Cross slopes are usually in the range of 0.015 to 0.020 ft/ft (m/m). Urban areas with curbed pavements are more likely to have a slope near the upper limit, while rural roadways tend to have a little flatter cross slope. The following guidelines are applicable to the location of the crown point: ● ●

●

●

Crowns should be located at or near lane lines. For pavements with three or four lanes, no more than two should slope in the same direction. Undivided pavement sections should be crowned in the middle when the number of lanes is even, and at the edge of the center lane when the number is odd. Narrow raised median sections should be crowned in the middle, so that the majority of the pavement will drain to the outside.

119

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.21 Guide for Selecting Lane Width for Rural Areas(A) Minimum lane widths, ft,(B) for design speed, mi/h Functional classification

Design year ADT

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70 or >

Interstate, other freeways and expressways Arterial

ALL

—

—

—

—

—

—

12

12

12

12

12

> 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 < 400

— — — — —

— — — — —

— — — — —

— — — — —

12 12 11 11 11

12 12 11 11 11

12 12 12 12 12

12 12 12 12 12

12 12 11 10 10 12 12 (D) 10 10 9

12 12 11 10 10 12 12 (D) 11 10 9

12 12 12 12 11 11 10 11 10 10 12 12 12 12 (D) (D) 11 11 10 10 9 9

12 12 12 12 12 (C) 12 12 12 11 11 12 12

12 12 12 12 12

> 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 < 400 > 4000 2001–4000

12 12 12 12 12 (C) 12 12 11 11 10 12 12

12 12 12 11 11 12 12

— — — — — — —

— — — — — — —

11 11 10

12 11 11

12 11 11

— — —

— — —

Collector

Local

1001–2000 400–1000 < 400

12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 10 10 12 12 12 12 (D) (D) 11 11 11 11 9 10

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Notes: (A) There may be some rural locations that are urban in character. An example would be a village where adjacent development and other conditions resemble an urban area. In such cases, urban design criteria may be used. (B) The number of lanes should be determined by a capacity analysis. (C) May be 11 ft on nonfederal projects if design year ADT includes less than 25 (B) and (C) truck units. (D) An 11-ft lane width may be retained on reconstructed highways if the alignment and safety records are satisfactory. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

Shoulders. A shoulder is the area adjacent to the roadway that (1) when properly designed, can provide lateral support to the pavement, (2) is available to the motorist in emergency situations, and (3) can be used to maintain traffic during construction. Graded shoulder width is the width of the shoulder measured from the edge of the pavement to the intersection of the shoulder slope and the foreslope. Treated shoulder width is that portion of the graded shoulder that has been improved to at least stabilized aggregate or better. Figure 2.13 illustrates these definitions. Four basic types of shoulders are used: (1) paved, (2) bituminous surface treated, (3) stabilized aggregate, and (4) turf. Paved shoulders may be rigid (concrete) or flexible (asphalt). Turf shoulders are usually used on low-volume, uncurbed, local roads. Tables 2.22 and 2.23 provide recommended shoulder widths and types based on functional classification and traffic volumes or locale.

120

14 12 10 10 8 12 10 8 6 6 12 10 8 6 6

All

> 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 < 400 > 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 < 400 > 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 < 400

Interstate, Other Freeways & Expressways Arterial (K) 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 (O) 4 (P) 8 (Q) 8 (Q) 6 (O) 4 (P)

12 Rt. 4 Med. (F)

Without barrier 6:1 or flatter foreslope

10 8 6 6 4 8 (M) 4 4 4 (P) 8 (M) 4 4 4 (P)

12 Rt. (G) 4 Med. (F)

Treated width, ft

PVD (I) PVD (I) BIT.SRF.TRT.(L) BIT.SRF.TRT.(L) STBL.AGG. BIT.SRF.TRT. (L) BIT.SRF.TRT. (L) STBL.AGG. STBL.AGG. STBL. AGG BIT.SRF.TRT.(L) BIT.SRF.TRT. (L) STBL.AGG STBL.AGG. STBL.AGG.

Paved

Type (C)

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. (A) There may be rural locations that are urban in character. An example would be a village where adjacent development and other conditions resemble an urban area. In such cases, urban design criteria (Table 2.21) may be used. (B) Rounding should be 4 ft where the foreslope begins beyond the clear zone or where guardrail is installed and foreslope is steeper than 6:1. No rounding is required when the foreslope is 6:1 or flatter. (C) Turf shoulders may be used on nonstate maintained roads at option of local government if current year ADT includes less than 250 (B) and (C) trucks. Turf shoulders are not to be used on state-maintained roads. (D) Concrete barrier may be placed at the edge of treated shoulder when used in lieu of guardrail.

Local

Collector (K)

17 Rt. 9 Med. (E)

Design year ADT

Functional classification

With barrier or foreslope steeper than 6:1

Graded width, ft

TABLE 2.22 Guide for Selecting Shoulders for Rural Areas(A)

8 8 8 4 4 8 8 8 4 4 8 8 8 4 4

10

50

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

—

50

Rounding, ft (B) for design speed, mi/h

12 10 8 8 6 10 (N) 8 (N) 6 (N) 4 4 10 (N) 8 (N) 6 (N) 4 4

(H)

Guardrail offset, ft (from traveled way) (D)

121

(E) If 6 or more lanes, use 17 ft. If the truck traffic is less than 250 DDHV use 15 ft. (F) If 6 or more lanes, use 12 ft. If truck traffic is less than 250 DDHV, 10 ft treated width may be used. (G) Use 10 ft if truck traffic is less than 250 DDHV. If 10 ft treated width is used, graded width may be reduced by 2 ft. (H) Guardrail offset is treated width plus 2 ft. (I) A fully paved shoulder is preferred, but may not be economically feasible. Therefore, a minimum 2 ft of the treated shoulder should be paved. The remainder of the treated shoulder may be either stabilized aggregate or bituminous surface–treated material according to the criteria stipulated in Notes (K) and (L). (J) Use bituminous surface treated if design year ADT includes between 250 and 1000 (B) and (C) truck units. (K) The median shoulder width criteria for interstates, other freeways and expressways shall apply to the medians of divided arterials and divided collectors. (L) Stabilized aggregate may be used on state-maintained roads if the design year ADT includes less than 250 (B) and (C) truck units. Paved shoulders are recommended if the design year ADT includes over 1000 (B) and (C) truck units. (M) Use 6 ft if design year ADT includes less than 501 (B) and (C) truck units. If 6 ft treated width is used, graded width may be reduced to 10 ft and minimum barrier offset will be 8 ft. (N) Whenever a design exception is approved for graded shoulder width, the guardrail offset may be reduced but shall not be less than 4 ft. (O) A 6-ft turf shoulder may be used with a 4:1 or flatter foreslope. (P) See AASHTO’S Guidelines for Geometric Design for Very Low-Volume Local Roads for values. (Q) An 8-ft graded shoulder may be used with a 4:1 or flatter foreslope. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

122 TABLE 2.23

CHAPTER TWO Guide for Selecting Lane Width and Shoulders for Urban Areasa Minimum curbed shoulder width,b ft

Functional classification

Lane width, ft Locale

Minimum Preferred

Interstates, All other freeways, and expressways Arterial streets 50 mi/h or more Less than 50 mi/h Collector streets Commercial or industrial Residential Local streets Commercial or industrial Residential

Without parking lane

With parking lanec —

12

12

12 right paved, 4 median paved d,e

12 12h 11

12 12 12

10 each side paved f,g 1–2 paved 1–2 paved

10–12 paved 9–10 paved

11 11

12 12

1–2 paved 1–2 paved

7–10 paved 9 paved

10i

11

1–2 paved

7 paved

—

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. a Use rural criteria (Tables 2.21 and 2.22) for uncurbed shoulders. Rural functional classification should be determined after checking the urban route extension into a rural area. b See Sections 305.3.2 and 305.3.3 for use of curbs and notes on curb/guardrail relationships. c Use minimum lane width if, in the foreseeable future, the parking lane will be used for through traffic during peak hours or continuously. d Use 10 ft median shoulder on facilities with 6 or more lanes. Use 12 ft median shoulder on facilities with 6 or more lanes and when truck traffic exceeds 250 DDHV. e May be reduced to 10 ft if the truck traffic is less than 250 DDHV. f May be reduced to 8 ft if DHV is less than 250. g The median shoulder width for divided arterials shall follow the median criteria for Interstates, other Freeways and Expressways. h Lane width may be reduced to 11 ft where right-of-way is limited and current truck ADT is less than 250; however, on all Federal Aid Primary (FAP) roadways at least one 12-ft lane in each direction is required. FAP listings may be obtained from Office of Technical Services’s Roadway Inventory reports. i Lane width may be 9 ft where right-of-way is limited and current ADT is less than 250. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

Whenever practical, shoulders should be designed to be wide enough and strong enough to accommodate temporary traffic, especially on high-volume roadways. Figures 2.14, 2.15, and 2.16 provide information on recommended cross slopes [ft/ft (m/m)] and allowable grade breaks depending on the type of shoulder chosen. 2.3.2 Grading and Side Slopes This section is concerned with the design of the slopes, ditches, parallel channels, and interchange grading. It incorporates into the roadside design the concepts of vehicular safety developed through dynamic testing. Designers are urged to consider flat foreslopes and backslopes, wide gentle ditch sections, and elimination of barriers. Slopes. Several combinations of slopes and ditch sections may be used in the grading of a project. Details and use of these combinations are discussed in subsequent paragraphs. In general, slopes should be made as flat as possible to minimize the necessity for barrier protection and to maximize the opportunity for a driver to recover

123

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.24 Recommended Pavement Widening on Horizontal Curves, ft, for WB-50 Design Vehicles Pavement width on tangent, ft 24

22

20

Design speed, mi/h

Design speed, mi/h

Design speed, mi/h

Degree of curve

30 to 39

40 to 49

50 to 59

60 to 69

70 and over

30 to 39

40 to 49

50 to 59

60 and over

30 to 39

40 to 49

50 to 59

60 and over

1°00 2°00 3°00 4°00 5°00 6°00 7°00 8°00 9°00 10°00 11°00 12°00 13°00 14°00 14°30 15°00 18°00 19°00 21°00 22°00 25°00 26°00 26°30

0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 6.5 7.5 7.5 8.0

0 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.0

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5

0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.5 2.5

0 0.5 1.0 1.5

1.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.5 7.5 8.5 8.5 9.0

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.5 5.5

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.5

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 8.5 9.5 8.5 10.0

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.5

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.5

2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Note: Values less than 2.0 ft may be disregarded. Multiply table values by 1.5 for three lanes and by 2.0 for four lanes. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

control of a vehicle after leaving the traveled way. Regardless of the type of grading used, projects should be examined in an effort to obtain flat slopes at low costs. For example, fill slopes can be flattened with material that might otherwise be wasted, and backslopes can be flattened to reduce borrow. To better understand the various types of grading, it is necessary to become familiar with the concept of a clear zone. Clear zone is defined as the unobstructed, relatively flat area provided beyond the edge of the traveled way for the recovery of errant vehicles and includes any shoulders or auxiliary lanes (Ref. 1, 2). Chapter 6 discusses the roadside safety aspects of designing for the clear zone, including the use of barriers to shield objects in the clear zone. In the following paragraphs, four types of roadside grading are described. The designer must select the appropriate one for the roadway being designed.

124

FIGURE 2.12

CHAPTER TWO

Location of pavement transition in relation to the superelevation transition.

Safety grading is the shaping of the roadside using 6:1 or flatter slopes within the clear zone area, and 3:1 or flatter foreslopes and recoverable ditches beyond the clear zone. Safety grading is used on interstate highways, other freeways, and expressways. Figures 2.17 and 2.18 show many of these details. Clear zone grading is the shaping of the roadside using 4:1 or flatter foreslopes and traversable ditches within the clear zone area. Foreslopes of 3:1 may be used but are not measured as part of the clear zone distance. Clear zone grading is recommended


125

FIGURE 2.13 Cross sections of shoulders showing graded and treated shoulder widths. Conversions: 2 ft 0.61 m, 3 ft 0.91 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

for undivided rural facilities where the design speed exceeds 50 mi/h (80 km/h), the design hourly volume is 100 or greater, and at least one of the following conditions exists: ● ●

●

The wider cross section is consistent with present or future planning for the facility. The project is new construction or major reconstruction involving significant length. The wider cross section can be provided at little or no additional cost.

126

CHAPTER TWO

NORMAL AND LOW SIDE OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS 0.016 0.04∗

0.08 (.083 ′/' ) ∗or rate of super if greater

CURBED–HIGH SIDE OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS 0.03 max. 0.04

0.08

(.083′/' )

7% max. break

0.08 5′ Rounding

0.04

03

Greater than 0.

Pavement slope 8′ or 10′

4′ Rounding an Greater th

2′

0.03

(.083′/' )

0.08

0.04 4′ UNCURBED–HIGH SIDE OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS 0.06

7% max. break Greater than

Varies 0.04 to 0.01

5′ Rounding

0.08

0.01

0.06

0.08

8′ or 10′ Pavement slope 0.06 max.

Varies 0.04 to 0.01 4′ Rounding

7% max. break 0.06 Greater than

0.01

2′

Pavement slope 4′ FIGURE 2.14 Recommended cross slopes and grade breaks for paved shoulders. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Figure 2.19 shows examples of clear zone grading and traversable ditches. Standard grading is the shaping of the roadside using 3:1 or flatter foreslopes and normal ditches. Standard grading is used on undivided facilities where the conditions for the use of safety grading or clear zone grading do not exist. The designer should ensure that any obstacles within the clear zone receive proper protection. Figure 2.20 shows examples of standard grading and normal ditches.


127

NORMAL AND LOW SIDE OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS 0.016∗

0.06∗ 0.08

∗ or rate of super if greater

HIGH SIDE OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS 0.06

0.01 or less

0.08

7% max. break 2′– 6" 0.06

0.08

0.01 re than

Mo

8′– 0" Pavement slope 0.01 or less

7 % max. break

0.06

2′– 0"

0.08 0.06 0.08

More

.01 than 0

4′– 0"

Pavement slope

FIGURE 2.15 Recommended cross slopes and grade breaks for bituminous surface treated or stabilized aggregate shoulders. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Barrier grading is the shaping of the roadside when a barrier is required for slope protection. Normally, 2:1 foreslopes and normal ditch sections are used. Figure 2.20 includes an example of barrier grading. Rounding of Slopes. Slopes should be rounded at the break points and at the intersection with the existing ground line to reduce the chance of a vehicle’s becoming airborne and to harmonize with the existing topography. Rounding at various locations is illustrated in Figs. 2.17 to 2.20. Special Median Grading. Figure 2.21c shows some examples of median grading when separate roadway profiles are used.

128

CHAPTER TWO NORMAL AND LOW SIDE (INNER SIDE) SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS

0.016∗

0.08

∗or rate of super

RISING SIDE (OUTER SIDE) OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS IN TRANSITION

7% max. break

From 0.016 to 0.01

0.018

HIGH SIDE OF SUPERELEVATED SECTIONS 0.01 From > . To 0.08 max

2′– 6"

Pavement slope 0.08

The break at the edge of the pavement shall not exceed 7%. FIGURE 2.16 Recommended cross slopes and grade brakes for turf shoulders. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Rock and Shale Slopes. In rock or shale cuts, the maximum rate of slope should be determined by a soils engineer. In deep rock or shale cuts where slopes are steeper than 1:1, a 10-ft-wide (3.05-m) bench should be provided between the top of the ditch backslope and the toe of the rock face as illustrated in Fig. 2.21a. In shale cuts, the designer should not use backslopes steeper than 2:1 unless excessive waste would result. In any event, 2:1 slopes should be used for all shale cut sections less than 20 ft (7 m) in depth, and the bench should be omitted. In this discussion, depth of cut is measured from the top of shale or rock to the ditch flow line. Backslopes steeper than 2:1 should not be used in rock cuts until the depth exceeds 16 ft (5 m). In such cases the bench may be omitted. Curbed Streets.

Figure 2.22 shows typical slope treatments next to curbed streets.

Driveways and Crossroads. At driveways or crossroads, where the roadside ditch is within the clear zone distance and where clear zone grading can be obtained, the ditch and pipe should be located as shown on Fig. 2.23.


129

b

If backslope exceeds 3:1, use 40′ radius as shown above.

FIGURE 2.17 Cross sections showing safety grading for four different conditions. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Ditches. When the depth or velocity of the design discharge accumulating in a roadside or median ditch exceeds the desirable maximum established for the various highway classifications, a storm sewer will be required to intercept the flow and carry it to a satisfactory outlet. If right-of-way and earthwork considerations are favorable, a deep, parallel side ditch (see Fig. 2.21b) may be more practical and should be considered instead of a storm sewer. In some cases where large areas contribute flow to a highly erodible soil cut, an intercepting ditch may be considered near the top of the cut to intercept the flow from the

130

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.18 Details of ditch rounding for safety grading. Conversions: 1 ft 0.305 m, 1 in 0.0254 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

outside and thereby relieve the roadside ditch. Constant-depth ditches (usually 18 in or 0.46 m deep) are desirable. Where used, the minimum pavement profile grades should be 0.24 to 0.48 percent. Where flatter pavement grades are necessary, separate ditch profiles are developed and the ditch flow line elevations shown on each cross section. Parallel Channels. Where it is determined that a stream intercepted by the roadway improvement is to be relocated parallel to the roadway, the channel should be located beyond the limited access line (or highway easement line) in a separate channel easement. This arrangement locates the channel beyond the right-of-way fence, if one is to be installed. Figure 2.21b shows a parallel channel section. This does not apply to conventional intercepting erosion control ditches located at the top of cut slopes in rolling terrain. In areas of low fill and shallow cut, protection along a channel by a wide bench is usually provided. Fill slope should not exceed 6:1 when this design is used, and maximum height from shoulder edge to bench should generally not exceed 10 ft (3.05 m). If it should become necessary to use slopes steeper than 6:1, guiderail may be necessary


131

FIGURE 2.19 Examples of clear zone grading and traversable ditches. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

and fill slopes as steep as 2:1 may be used. In cut sections 5 ft (1.52 m) or more in depth, earth barrier protection can be provided. This design probably affords greater protection where very deep channels are constructed and requires less excavation. Where the sections alternate between cut and fill and it is desired to use but a single design, earth barrier protection is less costly if waste excavation material is available. Likewise, bench protection is less costly if borrow is needed on the project as a whole. Earth bench or earth barrier protection provided adjacent to parallel channels should not be breached for any reason other than to provide an opening for a natural or relocated stream that requires a drainage structure larger in rise than 42 in (1.07 m). Outlet pipes from median drains or side ditches should discharge directly into the parallel channel. Channels and toe-of-slope ditches, used in connection with steep fill slopes, are both removed from the normal roadside section by benches. The designer should establish control offsets to the center of each channel or ditch at appropriate points that govern alignment so the flow will follow the best and most direct course to the outlet. Bench width should be varied as necessary.

132

CHAPTER TWO

Slope all benches to drain (3 to 5% recommended)

FIGURE 2.20 Examples of standard grading and normal ditches. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Interchange Grading. Interchange interiors should be contour-graded so that maximum safety is provided and the least amount of guiderail is required. Figures 2.24 and 2.25 show examples. The generous use of flat slopes (6:1 or flatter) will also be easier for maintenance crews to work with. Sight distance is critical for passenger vehicles on ramps as they approach entrance or merge areas. Therefore, sight distance should be unobstructed by landscaping, earth mounds, or other barriers on the merging side of the vehicle. Crossroads. At a road crossing within an interchange area, bridge spill-through slopes should be 2:1, unless otherwise required by structure design. They should be flattened to 3:1 or flatter in each corner cone and maintained at 3:1 or flatter if within the interior of an interchange. Elsewhere in interchange interiors, fill slopes should not exceed 3:1. Ramps. Roadside design for ramps should be based on Fig. 2.17 or 2.18, depending on the mainline grading concept.

133


DESIGNS FOR ROCK CUTS 2:1

Clear Zone

Soil Top of rock Use 2:1 slope where depth of rock is less than 16′

Use 2:1 slope in shale if excavated material can replace borrow

R

10′ Bench Top of rock Omit bench if slope of rock face is 1:1 or less

(a)

DESIGNS FOR DEEP PARALLEL SIDE DITCHES 40′ min. for 20′ R ditch, 50 min. for 40′ R ditch L/A 10′ min.

10′ 5′ min.

10:1

3:1

CUT SECTION

R

EARTH BARRIER PROTECTION

L/A

42′ minimum MEDIUM FILL

8:1∗ 8:1∗

LOW FILL

2:1

Channel easement

10′ min.

2:1

1/ ′′ per foor 4

BENCH PROTECTION

2:1

FILL SECTION

∗6:1 Slope may be used

(b)

Channel easement

ALTERNATE MEDIAN DESIGNS–SEPARATE PROFILES 1/ 2

Normal median width

Varia

R

ble s

lope

2:1

max

Clear zone

Normal median treatment R

8:1∗ Variab le

4′ Rounding Rounding ∗6:1 Slope my be used

Varia ble slo

pe ste

eper

3:1 Ma

than

3:1

ximum



(c) FIGURE 2.21 Examples of special designs for grading. (a) Designs for rock cuts. (b) Designs for deep, parallel side ditches. (c) Alternate median designs. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Gore Area. Gore areas of trumpets, diamonds, and exteriors of loops adjacent to the exit point should be graded to obtain slopes of 6:1 or flatter, which will not endanger a vehicle unable to negotiate the curvature because of excessive speed. Trumpet Interiors. Interior areas of trumpets (Fig. 2.24) should be graded to slopes not in excess of 8:1, sloping downward from each side of the triangle to a single, rounded low point. Roadside ditches should not be used. Exteriors should be graded in accordance with mainline or ramp standards.

134

CHAPTER TWO R/W

Variable

Variable, 0.04 to 0.08

slope

Type 2 Curb & Gutter 1 min (0.3 m) Edge of pavement

e

Variable, 0.04 to 0.08

slop Variable

0.02

Type 2 Curb & Gutter FIGURE 2.22 Examples of slope treatment adjacent to curbed streets. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

Design speed 50 mi/h (80 km/h) or more

50′ (15 m) min. 8:1

8:1

Toe of backslope

Clear zone (min.)

Flowline 20′ (6 m) min.

Edge of shoulder Edge of pavement

2:1

8 :1

8:1

2:1

To be used on clear zone grading projects where the roadside ditch flowline is located within the clear zone distance FIGURE 2.23 Slopes and ditches at driveway and crossroad in cut or low fill for use on clear zone grading projects where ditch is within clear zone distance. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

135

FIGURE 2.24 Contour grading of trumpet interior at interchange with contour elevations in feet. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

136

CHAPTER TWO

Loop Interiors. In cut, the interior of a loop should be graded to form a normal ditch section adjacent to the lower part of the loop, and the backslope should be extended to intersect the opposite shoulder of the upper part of the loop. This applies unless the character and the amount of material or the adjacent earthwork balances indicate that the cost would be prohibitive. Roadside cleanup and landscaping should be provided in undisturbed areas of loop interiors. If channels are permitted to cross the loop interior, slopes should not be steeper than 4:1. Figure 2.25 shows an example. Diamond Interiors. If the location of the ramp intersection at the crossroad is relatively near the main facility, a continuous slope between the upper roadway shoulder and the lower roadway ditch will provide the best and most pleasing design. If the ramp

FIGURE 2.25 Contour grading of loop interior in cut section at interchange with contour elevations shown in feet. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)


137

intersection at the crossroad is located a considerable distance from the main facility, then both ramp and mainline roadsides should have independent designs, until the slopes merge near the gore. If the quadrant is entirely, or nearly so, in cut, the combination of a 3:1 backslope at the low roadway ditch and a gentle slope down from the high roadway shoulder will provide the best design in the wide portion of the quadrant. Approaching the gore, the slopes should transition to continuous 4:1 and 6:1 or flatter slopes. Quadrants located entirely in fill areas should have independently designed roadways for ramp, mainline, and crossroad. Each should be provided with normal slopes not greater than 3:1, with the otherwise ungraded areas sloped to drain without using ditches. If the quadrant is located part in cut and part in fill, the best design features a gentle fill slope at the upper roadway and a gentle backslope at the lower roadway, joined to a bench at the existing ground level that is sloped to drain. The combination of a long diamond ramp having gentle alignment with a loop ramp in the same interchange quadrant is not to be treated as a trumpet. Each ramp should be designed independently of the other in accordance with the suggested details set forth above.

2.3.3 Bridge Criteria Although bridge engineering is discussed in Chap. 4, information on pertinent physical dimensions is presented here. Lateral clearance at underpasses and vertical clearance over roadways, as used in Ohio, are given in Table 2.25 for new and reconstructed bridges. The table notes provide a good insight into when variations from the standards are allowed.

2.3.4 Interchange Elements Cross-section information pertaining to interchange elements, such as ramps and directional roadways, is given in Fig. 2.26. This information includes pavement and shoulder dimensions for acceleration-deceleration lanes, one- and two-lane directional roadways, and medians between adjacent ramps. Notice that for a single-lane ramp, the shoulder and guiderail offset distances are greater on the driver’s right-hand side than on the left. This is to provide more width for drivers to pull over in emergencies and to allow people a better opportunity to go around disabled vehicles.

2.3.5 Medians A median is a desirable element on all streets or roads with four or more lanes. The principal functions of a median are to prevent interference of opposing traffic, to provide a recovery area for out-of-control vehicles, to provide areas for emergency stopping and left turn lanes, to minimize headlight glare, and to provide width for future lanes. A median should be highly visible both day and night and in definite contrast to the roadway. Width. The width of a median is the distance between the inside edges of the pavement. See Fig. 2.27 for examples of various medians. The width depends upon the type of facility, topography, and available right-of-way. In rural areas with flat or rolling terrain, the desirable median width for freeways is 60 to 84 ft (18 to 26 m). Although the minimum median width is normally 40 ft (12 m), narrower medians may be used in rugged terrain. A constant-width median is not necessary, and in fact,

138

Right, 12 Left, 4d,i

10d 8d 6d 6d 4 8m 4m 4 m,n 4 m,n 4 m,o 8m 3 3 3 2

All

4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 400 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 400 4000 2001–4000 1001–2000 400–1000 400

Interstates, Freeways and expressways

Arterials

Collectors

Locals

d,e

Minimum

Design year ADT

Functional class

Rural

10 8 6 4 4

10 8 6 4 4

12 10 8 8 6

Right, 14 Left, 6 g, j

f,g

Preferred

Urban, minimum

For curbed shoulders, use shoulder width, Table 2.21.

Traffic

Lateral clearances, ft

For uncurbed shoulders, use rural criteria at left.

On bridgea

l

l

k, l

k

Preferred

Under bridgeb Minimum

Recommended Lateral and Vertical Clearances for New and Reconstructed Bridges

Curbed treated shoulder width (Fig. 2.24) plus barrier clearance measured from the face of the barrier to the shielded object.

TABLE 2.25

Clear zone width p

14.5

14.5

16.5h

16.5

h

Minimum

15.0

15.0

17.0

17.0

Preferred

Vertical clearance over surfaced roadway, ftc

139

Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. a Distance measured from edge of the traveled lane to face of curb or railing if no curb is provided. b Distance measured from edge of traveled lane to face of walls or abutments and piers. c To minimize structure cost, design tolerances for clearances are plus 4 in, minus 0 in. Sign supports and pedestrian structures have a 1-ft additional clearance. Clearances shown are over paved shoulder as well as pavement width. d If bridge is considered to be a major structure having a length of 200 ft or more, the width may be reduced, subject to economic studies, but to no less than 4 ft. e Where the truck DDHV is 250 or less, may be reduced 2 ft. f Where the truck DDHV is 250 or less, the right shoulder width may be reduced 2 ft. g Where concrete barrier is used on the approach slabs or in advance of the bridge, the preferred shoulder width will equal the minimum shoulder width. h A 16.5-ft minimum vertical clearance applies to all rural sections and the single designated route in urban areas. On other urban routes, not on the single designated route, the vertical clearance should not be less than 15.5 ft. i If 6 or more lanes, provide 12 ft width. Where truck DDHV is 250 or less, the left shoulder bridge width may be reduced by 2 ft. j If 6 or more lanes, provide 14 ft width. Where the truck DDHV is 250 or less, the left width may be reduced 2 ft. k In locations with restricted right-of-way, may be reduced to a clearance of 8.0 ft right side, 4.5 ft median side, plus barrier clearance, except where footnote l applies. l May be reduced to a clearance of 2 ft plus barrier clearance on urban streets with restricted right-of-way and a design speed less than 50 mi/h (80 km/h). m May be 3-ft width if bridge length exceeds 100 ft. n May be 3-ft width if turf shoulder is used. o May be 2-ft width if turf shoulder is used. p Clear zone width is defined in Art. 6.2. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

140

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.26 Cross-section information for interchange elements—pavement, shoulders, and medians. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

variable-width medians and independent profiles may be used for the two roadways. Narrow medians with a barrier (barrier medians) are normally used in urban areas. Under normal design, the median width will vary depending on the width of the barrier and the shoulder width required (Table 2.23). Types. Medians are divided into types depending upon width and treatment of the median area and drainage arrangement. In general, raised or barrier medians are applicable to urban areas, while wide, depressed medians apply to rural areas. Figure 2.27 shows examples. Medians in rural areas are normally depressed to form a swale in the center and are constructed without curbs. The type of median used in an urban area


141

FIGURE 2.27 Typical designs for medians. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

depends on the traffic volume, speed, degree of access, and available right-of-way. On major streets with numerous business drives, a median consisting of an additional lane, striped as a continuous two-way left turn lane, is appropriate. A solid 6-in-high (0.15-m) lane concrete median may be used in low-speed areas (where the design speed is 40 mi/h (64 km/h) or less) and where an all-paved section is desired and a wider median cannot be justified. Barrier medians are normally recommended for urban facilities when the design speed is over 40 mi/h (64 km/h). However, care must be

142

CHAPTER TWO

exercised when barrier medians are used on expressways with unsignalized at-grade intersections because of sight distance limitations and end treatments of the barrier. U-Turn Median Openings. U-turn median openings may be provided on expressways, freeways, or interstate highways with nonbarrier medians where space permits and there is a need. U-turns may be needed for proper operation of police and emergency vehicles, as well as for equipment engaged in physical maintenance, traffic service, and snow and ice control. U-turn crossings should not be constructed in barrier-type medians. When U-turn median openings are permitted, it is intended they be spaced as close to 3-mi (4.8-km) intervals as possible. Crossings should be located at points approximately 1000 ft (305 m) beyond the end of each interchange speed change lane. An example of a typical U-turn median opening is shown in Fig. 2.28, which indicates geometric features applicable to crossings located in medians of widths ranging from 40 to 84 ft (12 to 26 m). Turning radius should be modified proportionately for medians of varying widths. Tapers should be 200 ft (61 m) in length for all median widths. The profile grade line should normally be an extension of the cross slope of the shoulder paving, rounded at the lowest point.

2.3.6 Curbs The type of curb and its location affect driver behavior patterns, which, in turn, affect the safety and utility of a road or street. Curbs, or curbs and gutters, are used mainly in urban areas. They should be used with caution where design speeds exceed 40 mi/h (64 km/h). Following are various reasons for justifying the use of curbs, or curbs and gutters: ● ●

●

Where required for drainage Where needed for channelization, delineation, control of access, or other means of improving traffic flow and safety To control parking where applicable

Types of Curb. There are two general categories of curbs: barrier curbs and mountable curbs. Barrier curbs are relatively high [6 in (0.15 m) or more] and steep-faced. Mountable curbs are 6 in (0.15 m) or less in height and have flatter, sloping faces so that vehicles can cross them with varying degrees of ease. Figure 2.29 (Ref. 14) shows various curb designs that are commonly used on roadways. Types 1, 3, and 4 are examples of mountable curbs and are used for channelizing traffic, especially in islands and medians. Types 2 and 6 are barrier curbs used along pavement edges in urban areas and are designed to handle drainage more efficiently. Types 7 and 8 are tall barrier curbs designed to provide a more positive traffic barrier than the others. Type 7 is used as an alternate for guiderail in low-speed urban situations. Position of Curb. Curbs are normally used at the edge of pavement on urban streets where the design speed is 40 mi/h (64 km/h) or less. Curbs at the edge of pavement have an effect on the lateral placement of moving vehicles. Drivers tend to shy away from them. Therefore, all curbs should be offset at least 1 ft (0.3 m) and preferably 2 ft (0.6 m) from the edge of the traffic lane. Where curb and gutter are used, the standard gutter width is 2 ft (0.6 m). On roads where the design speed exceeds 40 mi/h (64 km/h), curbs should be used only in special cases. Special cases may include, but are not limited to, the use of curb to control surface drainage or to reduce right-of-way requirements in restricted areas.

143 0.04

26.93 18.61

16.31 12.73 9.16

11.50 9.13 6.75

84 60 50 40

35.24

55.20

R-1, ft 24.87

D, in 17.25

M, ft

R-2, ft

Dimensions Applicable toVarying Median Demands

FIGURE 2.28 Design for U-turn median opening. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

0.04

144

FIGURE 2.29 Examples of several designs for curbs. (Conversions: 1 ft 0.305 m, 1 in 0.0254 m). (From Standard Construction Drawings, Bureau of Location and Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)


145

When it is necessary to use curbs on roads where the design speed is over 40 mi/h, they should not be closer to the traffic than 4 ft (1.2 m) or the edge of the treated shoulder, whichever is greater. Curb/Guiderail Relationship. If curbs are used in conjunction with guiderail on roads having a design speed in excess of 40 mi/h (64 km/h), the face of curb should preferably be located either at or behind the face of guiderail. Under no conditions should the face of curb be located more than 9 in (0.23 m) in front of the face of rail. This restriction is necessary to prevent a vehicle from “vaulting” over the rail or striking it too high to be contained. Although guiderail is not normally used on curbed roadways having design speeds of 40 mi/h (64 km/h) or less, the same criteria used for higher-speed roadways should apply. Where this is not feasible or practical, the curb may be placed in front of the rail. Regardless of the design speed of the roadway or the placement of the curb, the face of guiderail should not be located closer than 4 ft (1.2 m) to the roadway. Curb Transitions. Curb and raised median beginnings and endings should be tapered from the curb height to 0 in (0 m) in 10 ft (3 m). When an urban-type section with curbs at the edge of pavement changes to a rural-type section without curbs, the curb should be transitioned laterally at a 4:1 (longitudinal:lateral) rate to the outside edge of the treated shoulder, or 3 ft (0.9 m), whichever is greater. When a curbed side road intersects a mainline that is not curbed, the curb should be terminated no closer to the mainline edge of pavement than 8 ft (2.4 m) or the edge of the treated shoulder of the mainline, whichever is greater.

2.3.7 Pedestrian Facilities When pedestrian facilities are to be constructed or reconstructed as part of project plans, the facilities should be designed to accommodate the disabled. Guidance in design of pedestrian facilities with access for the disabled is available (Ref. 11). Walks. Walks should be provided in urban areas where pedestrian traffic currently exists or is planned in the future. Walks may be provided in rural areas where they will have sufficient use in relation to cost and safety. Walks are usually made of concrete, although asphalt or gravel may be used under special circumstances. Concrete walks are usually 4 in (100 mm) thick. At drive locations, the thickness is increased to 6 in (150 mm), or the drive thickness, whichever is greater. Asphalt or gravel walks are mostly used in parks, rest areas, etc., where there is low usage. Asphalt walks consist of 2 in (50 mm) of asphalt and 5 in (250 mm) aggregate base, while gravel walks are constructed of 4 in (100 mm) compacted aggregate base. Walk Design. The normal width of walks is 4 ft (1.2 m) for residential areas and 6 ft (1.8 m) for commercial areas or major school routes. In downtown areas, the walk width normally extends from the curb to the right-of-way or building line. Transverse slopes should be 1/4 in/ft (21 mm/m). The grade of the walk is normally parallel to the curb or pavement grade, but may be independent. The walk and the “tree lawn” (see next section) normally slope toward the pavement. Care should be taken in setting the pavement curb grade so that the sidewalk and the curb will not trap water or otherwise preclude usability of the adjoining property. The back edge of the walk should be located 2 ft (0.6 m) inside the right-of-way line, unless grading, utilities, or other considerations require a greater dimension.

146

CHAPTER TWO

Tree Lawn. The tree lawn is defined as the area between the front of the curb and the front edge of the sidewalk. Grass is usually provided in the tree lawn, although in some urban areas the tree lawn is paved. As shown in Fig. 2.30, in most cases, the desirable tree lawn width is 8 ft (2.4 m) or more. The 8-ft (2.4 m) width provides an area for snow storage and for traffic signs, and an adequate distance for elevation changes at drives. Tree lawn widths of less than 5 ft (1.5 m) result in locating of signposts close to pedestrians using the walk, and steep grades on drive profiles. The minimum tree lawn width is 2 ft (0.6 m). Border Area. In an urban area where a walk is not provided, the area between the face of curb and the right-of-way line is often referred to as a border. As indicated in Fig. 2.30d, the border width in residential areas should be at least 8 ft (2.4 m) and preferably 14 ft (4.3 m). In commercial areas, the minimum border width is 10 ft (3.0 m), while a 16-ft (4.9-m) width is preferable. Walks on Bridges. Walks should be provided on bridges located in urban or suburban areas having curbed sections under two conditions: (1) where there are existing walks on the bridge and/or bridge approaches, or (2) where evidence can be shown through local planning processes, or similar justification, that walks will be required in the near future (5 to 10 years). Anticipated pedestrian volumes of 50 per day justify a walk on one side, and 100 per day justify walks on both sides. Walks on bridges should preferably be 6 ft (1.8 m) wide in residential areas and 8 ft (2.4 m) wide in commercial areas measured from the face of curb to face of parapet. Widths, however, may be as much as 12 ft (3.7 m) in downtown areas. The minimum bridge walk width is 5 ft (1.5 m). Walks under Bridges. The criterion for providing walks at underpasses is basically the same as described above for walks on bridges. An exception is that in areas where there are no approach walks, space will be provided for future walks but walks will not be constructed with the project unless there is substantial concurrent approach walk construction. Where the approach walks at underpasses include a tree lawn, the tree lawn width may be carried through the underpass wherever space permits. Curb Ramps. A curb ramp is a portion of the walk that is modified to provide a gradual elevation transition through the face of the adjoining curb. It is designed to provide safe and convenient curb crossings for the disabled in wheelchairs, but it can also be used by others. Examples include wheeled vehicles maneuvered by pedestrians and bikeway traffic, when such use is permitted. Curb ramps should be provided where curb and walks are being constructed at intersections and other major points of pedestrian curb crossing such as mid-block crosswalks. When a curb ramp is built on one side of a street, a companion curb ramp is required on the opposite side of the street. The basic requirement is that a crosswalk must be accessible via curb ramps at both ends, not one end only. In most cases, curb ramps will be installed in all quadrants of an intersection. Curb ramps should be located within crosswalk markings to permit legal street crossings. The ramp location must be coordinated with drainage structures, utility poles, etc. The normal gutter profile should be continued through the ramp area, except the profile may be altered to avoid a location conflict between the ramp and a drainage structure. Drainage structures should not be located in the ramp or in front of the ramp. Catch basins should be placed upstream from the ramp.

147

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC R/W

6′ Residential 2′ Minimum

5′ Residential

8′ Commercial

6′ Commercial

2′ Minimum

0.02 Walk

0.04 Tree Lawn (a)

2′

7′ Residential

R/W

Min.

8′ Commercial 0.02 Walk

(b) R/W or Building

10′ Minimum 20′ Desirable 0.02 Walk

(c) R/W 8′ Minimum (Residential) 14′ Desirable (Residential)

10′ Minimum (Commercial) 16′ Desirable (Commercial) 0.04 (d)

FIGURE 2.30 Examples of walk designs. (a) Walk with tree lawn. (b) Walk with no tree lawn. (c) Walk in downtown area. (d) Border area with no walk. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

2.4 INTERSECTION DESIGN An intersection is defined as an area where two or more roadways join or cross. Each roadway extending from the intersection is referred to as a leg. The intersection of two roadways has four legs. When one roadway ends at the intersection with another roadway, a three-leg intersection, or T intersection, is formed. Some intersections have more than four legs, but this design should be avoided, since the operation of traffic movements

148

CHAPTER TWO

is usually inefficient. There are three general types of intersections: (1) at-grade, where two or more roadways cross in the same vertical plane, (2) grade-separated, where one roadway is bridged over or tunneled under the other roadway but no turning movements are allowed, and (3) interchanges, a special type of grade-separated intersection where turning movements are accommodated by ramps connecting the two roadways. 2.4.1 At-Grade Intersections At-grade intersections should be designed to promote the safe movement of traffic on all legs with a minimal amount of delay to drivers using the intersection. The amount of delay a driver experiences is the measure of effectiveness for signalized intersections as used in capacity analysis. Factors to be considered in designing an intersection are: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Traffic volumes on all legs, including separate counts for turning vehicles Sight distance Traffic control devices Horizontal alignment Vertical alignment Radius returns Drainage design Islands Left turn lanes Right turn lanes Additional through lanes Recovery areas Pedestrians Bicycles Lighting Development of adjacent property

Traffic Volumes. No intersection can be properly designed without first obtaining accurate traffic counts and reliable projections for the design year of the project. Traffic counts are best determined from actual field counts, including all turning movements, and are broken down by vehicle type. Vehicle types are divided into two groups. The first group includes passenger cars and type A commercial vehicles (pickup trucks and light delivery trucks not using dual tires). The second group includes type B commercial vehicles (tractor, semitrailer, truck-trailer combinations) and type C commercial vehicles (buses, dual-tired trucks with single or tandem rear axles). Adjustments are made to field counts to allow for day of the week, month of the year, time of day, and other site-related factors that may have a significant effect on the counts. Most urbanized areas have regional planning agencies that either provide or certify the traffic data used in intersection design. Traffic Control. ● ●

There are four basic types of traffic control at at-grade intersections:

Cautionary, or nonstop, control Stop control for minor traffic

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC ● ●

149

Four-way stop control Signal control

In discussing at-grade intersections, the terms major roadway and minor roadway are sometimes used to distinguish between the two roads. The major roadway usually has a higher functional classification and a greater volume of traffic. Cautionary, or nonstop, control is used only in special circumstances, such as at an entrance terminal on a freeway. Stop control for the minor roadway is one of the most common treatments found in practice. In these cases, the traffic volumes on the minor roadway are light enough that a signal is not required. The major roadway apparently has volumes low enough to allow gaps for the minor road traffic to enter or cross the intersection. Four-way stop control is effective in situations where the roadways have nearly equal traffic volumes but not great enough volume to justify installing a signal. Finally, signal control is used for intersections where volumes are large enough to preclude using one of the other types. Sight Distance. Adequate sight distance is an important consideration when designing an at-grade intersection. The alignment and grade on the major roadway should, as a minimum, provide stopping sight distance as given in Table 2.2. The criteria for intersection sight distance (Table 2.3) should also be met wherever possible. Figure 2.7 illustrates the lines of sight involved in intersection design. Horizontal Alignment Considerations. It is best to avoid locating an intersection on a curve. Since this is often impossible, it is recommended that intersection sites be selected where the curve superelevation is 1⁄2 in/ft (22 mm/m) or less. It is also recommended that intersections be located where the grade on the major roadway is 6 percent or less, with 3 percent the desirable maximum. Intersection angles of 70° to 90° are provided on new or relocated roadways. An angle of 60° may be satisfactory if right-of-way is to be purchased for a future grade separation and the smaller angle will avoid reconstruction of the intersecting road. In such cases, it may be desirable to locate the intersection so the separation structure can be constructed in the future without disrupting the intersection operation. Relocation of the minor road is often required to meet the desired intersection location, to avoid roadway segments with undesirable vertical alignments, and to adjust intersection angles. Horizontal curves on the minor roads should be designed to meet the design speed of the road. The minor road alignment should be as straight as possible. Figure 2.31 shows the alignment for a typical rural crossroad relocation. Vertical Alignment Considerations. On roadways with stop control at the intersection, the portion of the intersection located within 60 ft (18 m) of the edge of the mainline pavement is considered to be the intersection area. The pavement surface within this intersection area should be visible to the driver within the limits of the minimum stopping sight distance listed in Table 2.2. By being able to see the pavement surface (height of object of zero), the driver (height of eye of 3.5 ft or 1.07 m) can observe the radius returns and pavement markings and recognize an approaching intersection. Figure 2.32 shows acceptable practice for design of the intersection area. Combinations of pavement cross slopes and profile grades may produce unacceptable edge of pavement profiles in the intersection area. For this reason, edge of pavement profiles should be plotted and graphically graded to provide a smooth profile. Profile

150

CHAPTER TWO

Note 1.

Curve—This portion of the crossroad can occur by itself at “T” type or three-legged intersections. If possible, the radius of this curve should be commensurate with the design speed of the crossroad. Often, the length of the required profile controls the work length. The horizontal curvature is then chosen so it can be accomplished within this work length. Regardless of the length of the profile adjustment, it is desirable to provide at least a 230-ft (70-m) radius for this curve. When a 230-ft (70-m) radius incurs high costs, it is permissible to reduce this radius to a minimum of 150 ft (46 m).

Note 2.

Tangent and Approach Radii—The crossroad in this area should have a tangent alignment. For the condition shown, the alignment between the radius returns is tangent from one side of the road to the other. However, at some intersections with a minor through movement (for example, crossroad intersections of standard diamond ramps) it may be desirable to provide different intersection angles on each side of the through road.

Note 3.

Curve—The statements in (1) above also apply to this curve. With the reverse curve condition shown, the radius will often not exceed 250 ft (76 m) because flatter curves make the relocation extraordinarily long.

Note 4.

Tangent—This tangent should be approximately 150 ft (46 m) in length for 30 or 40 mi/h (48 or 64 km/h) design speeds on the existing road, and approximately 250 ft (76 m) for 50 or 60 mi/h (80 or 97 km/h) design speeds. These lengths are generous enough to allow reasonable superelevation transitions between the reverse curves. In general, it is usually not desirable to make this tangent any longer than required. If a longer tangent can be used, the curvature or intersection angle can be improved and these two design items are more important.

Note 5.

Curve—This curve should be much flatter than the other two curves. It should be capable of being driven at the normal design speed of the existing crossroad.

FIGURE 2.31 Typical rural crossroad relocation. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)


151

FIGURE 2.32 Crossroad profile for stop condition where through road has normal crown. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

grades within the intersection area for stop conditions are shown in Figs. 2.32 and 2.33. The grade outside the intersection area is controlled by the design speed of the crossroad. Normal design practices can be used outside the intersection area with the only restriction on the profile being the sight distance required as discussed above. Grade breaks are permitted at the edge of the mainline pavement for a stop condition. If these grade breaks exceed the limits given in note 3 of Fig. 2.32, they should be treated according to note 3 of Fig. 2.33. Several examples are shown in Fig. 2.33 of the use of grade breaks or short vertical curves adjacent to the edge of through pavement. Signalized intersections require a more sophisticated crossroad profile. Whenever possible, roadway profiles through the intersection area of a signalized intersection should be designed to meet the design speed of the roads. Grade breaks at signalized

152

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.33 Crossroad profiles for stop condition where through road is superelevated. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

intersections should be in accordance with Table 2.17. Since the grade break across a normal crowned pavement is usually 3.12 percent, it should be noted that the crown must be flattened. This will allow vehicles on the crossroad to pass through the intersection on a green signal safely without significantly adjusting their speed. The sight distance requirements within the intersection area that were discussed for stop-controlled roadways are also applicable for signalized intersections. Figure 2.34 shows examples of crossroad profiles through a signalized intersection. Radius Returns at Intersections. Intersection radii in rural areas should normally be 50 ft (15 m), except lesser, but no less than 35 ft (11 m), radii may be used at minor


153

FIGURE 2.34 Examples of crossroad profiles through signalized intersection. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

intersecting roads if judged appropriate for the volume and character of turning vehicles. Radii larger than 50 ft (15 m), a radius with a taper, or a three-center curve should be used at any intersection where the design must routinely accommodate semitrailer truck turning movements. Truck turning templates should be used to determine proper radii and stop bar location. Figure 2.35 shows an example of a turning template for a WB-50 semitrailer truck. Complete sets of turning templates may be obtained from the Institute of Traffic Engineers (Ref. 12). Also available for use with CAD drawings is a CAD-based software product called AutoTURN which is available from Transoft Solutions (Ref. 16). When used in applications with CAD drawings, it reproduces the turning paths for a wide variety of design vehicles. When truck turning

154

CHAPTER TWO

FIGURE 2.35 Template of minimum turning path for WB-50 semitrailer truck. Conversion: 1 ft 0.305 m. (From A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2004, with permission)


155

templates are used, a 2-ft (0.6-m) clearance should be provided between the edge of pavement and the closest tire path. Corner radii at street intersections in urban areas should consider the right-of-way available, the intersection angle, pedestrian traffic, approach width, and number of lanes. The following should be used as a guide: ●

●

●

●

Radii of 15 to 25 ft (4.6 to 7.6 m) are adequate for passenger vehicles and may be provided at minor cross streets where there are few trucks or at major intersections where there are parking lanes. Radii of 25 ft (7.6 m) or more should be provided at minor intersections on new or reconstruction projects where space permits. Radii of 30 ft (9.1 m) or more should be used where feasible at major cross street intersections. Radii of 40 ft (12.2 m) or more, three-centered compound curves, or simple curves with tapers to fit truck paths should be provided at intersections used frequently by buses or large trucks.

Drainage Considerations. Within the intersection area, the profile of the crossroad should be sloped wherever possible so the drainage from the crossroad will not flow across the through road pavement. For a stop condition, the 10 ft (3.0 m) of crossroad profile adjacent to the through pavement is normally sloped away from the through pavement, using at least a 1.56 percent grade, as shown in Fig. 2.32. The profiles of curbed radius returns within the intersection may be adjusted to accommodate location of catch basins. It is recommended that exaggerated profiles be used to make adjustments. To ensure smooth transitions around the returns, plot the pavement edges for at least 25 ft (7.6 m) going away from the returns for each leg of the intersection. Islands at Intersections. In intersection design, an island is defined as an area between traffic lanes that has been delineated to control traffic movements through the intersection. An island may be curbed or uncurbed. It may be concrete, grass, or the same material as the traffic lanes. Islands may be used at intersections for the following reasons: ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Separation of conflicts Control of angle of conflict Reduction in excessive pavement areas Favoring a predominant movement Pedestrian protection Protection and storage of vehicles Location of traffic control devices

Although certain situations require the use of islands, they should be used sparingly and avoided wherever possible. Curbed islands are most often used in urban areas where traffic is moving at relatively low speeds, 40 mi/h (64 km/h) or less, and fixed-source lighting is available. Curbed islands with an area smaller than 50 ft2 (4.6 m2) in urban locations and 75 ft2 (7.0 m2) in rural areas should generally not be used. An area of 100 ft2 (9.3 m2) is preferred in either case. Where pedestrian traffic will be using curbed islands, the islands must be provided with curb ramps. Islands delineated by pavement markings are often preferred in rural or lightly developed areas, when approach speeds are relatively high, where there is little pedestrian traffic, where fixed-source lighting is not

156

CHAPTER TWO

provided, or where traffic control devices are not located within the island. Nonpaved islands are normally used in rural areas. They are generally turf and are depressed for drainage purposes. Left Turn Lanes. Probably the single item having the most influence on intersection operation is the treatment of left-turning vehicles. Left turn lanes are generally desirable at most intersections. However, cost and space requirements do not permit their inclusion in all situations. Intersection capacity analysis procedures should be used to determine the number and use of all lanes. Left turn lanes are generally required under two conditions: (1) when left turn design volumes exceed 20 percent of total directional approach design volumes, and (2) when left turn design volumes exceed 100 vehicles per hour in peak periods. Opposing left turn lanes should be aligned opposite each other because of sight distance limitations. They are developed in several ways depending on the available width between opposing through lanes. Figure 2.36a shows the development required when additional width must be generated. The additional width is normally accomplished by widening on both sides. However, it could be done all on one side or the other. In Fig. 2.36b, the median width is sufficient to permit the development of the left turn lane. Figure 2.37 shows the condition where an offset left turn lane is required to obtain adequate sight distance in wide medians. In developing turn lanes, several types of tapers may be involved as shown in Fig. 2.36: Approach taper. An approach taper directs through traffic to the right. Approach taper lengths are calculated using Eq. (2.5) or (2.6). Departure taper. The departure taper directs through traffic to the left. Its length should not be less than that calculated using the approach taper equations. Normally, however, the departure taper begins opposite the beginning of the full-width turn lane and continues to a point opposite the beginning of the approach taper. Diverging taper. The diverging taper is the taper used at the beginning of the turn lane. The recommended length of a diverging taper is 50 ft (15 m). Tables 2.26 and 2.27 have been included to aid in determining the required lengths of left turn lanes at intersections. After determining the length of a left turn lane (Table 2.26), the designer should also check the length of storage available in the adjacent through lane(s) to ensure that access to the turn lane is not blocked by a backup in the through lane(s). To do this, Table 2.27 may be entered using the average number of through vehicles per cycle, and the required length read directly from the table. If two or more lanes are provided for the through movement, the length obtained should be divided by the number of through lanes to determine the required storage length. It is recommended that left turn lanes be at least 100 ft (30 m) long, and the maximum length be no more than 600 ft (183 m). The width of a left turn lane should desirably be the same as the normal lane widths for the facility. A minimum width of 11 ft (3.4 m) may be used in moderate- and high-speed areas, while 10 ft (3.0 m) may be provided in low-speed areas. Additional width should be provided whenever the lane is adjacent to a curbed median as discussed previously under “Position of Curb.” Double Left Turn Lanes. Double left turn lanes should be considered at any signalized intersection with left turn demands of 300 vehicles per hour or more. The actual need should be determined by performing a signalized intersection capacity analysis. Fully protected signal phasing is required for double left turns. When the signal phasing permits


157

FIGURE 2.36 Turning lane designs showing roadway taper. (a) Left turn lane with no median or median width less than WL. (b) Left turn lane with median wider than WL. (c) Right turn lane. Conversions: 50 ft 15 m, 100 ft 30 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

simultaneous left turns from opposing approaches, it may be necessary to laterally offset the double left turn lanes on one approach from the left turn lane(s) on the opposing approach to avoid conflicts in turning paths. Figure 2.38 provides an example. All turning paths of double left turn lanes should be checked with truck turning templates allowing 2 ft (0.6 m) between the tire path and edge of each lane. Expanded throat widths are necessary for double left turn lanes as illustrated in Fig. 2.39.

158 FIGURE 2.37 Offset left turn lane for sight distance at wide median. Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

159

HIGHWAY LOCATION, DESIGN, AND TRAFFIC TABLE 2.26

Determination of Length of Left Turn Lanes Turn demand volume for design speed, mi/h

Type of traffic control Signalized Unsignalized stopped crossroad Unsignalized through road

30–35 High A A A

40–45

Low* A A A

High B or C A C

50–60

Low* †

B or C A B

High †

Low* †

B or C A B or C†

B or C† A B

Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. Condition A: storage only: Length 50 ft (diverging taper) storage length Condition B: high-speed deceleration only: Design speed, mi/h Length (including 50-ft diverging taper), ft 40 125 45 175 50 225 55 285 60 345 Condition C: moderate-speed deceleration and storage: Design speed, mi/h Length (including 50-ft diverging taper), ft 40 111 45 125 50 143 storage length 55 164 60 181

冎

*Low is considered 10% or less of approach traffic volume. Whichever is greater. Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission. †

Right Turn Lanes. Exclusive right turn lanes are less critical in terms of safety than left turn lanes. However, right turn lanes can significantly improve the level of service of signalized intersections. They also provide a means of safe deceleration for rightturning traffic on high-speed facilities and separate right-turning traffic from the rest of the traffic stream at stop-controlled or signalized intersections. As a general guideline, an exclusive right turn lane should be considered when the right turn volume exceeds 300 vehicles per hour per lane. Figure 2.36c shows the design of right turn lanes. Table 2.27 may be used in preliminary design to estimate the storage required at signalized intersections. The recommended maximum length of right turn lanes at signalized intersections is 800 ft (244 m), with 100 ft (30 m) the minimum length. The blockage of the right turn lane by the through vehicles should also be checked using Table 2.27. With right-turn-on-red operation, it is imperative that access to the right turn lane be provided to achieve full utilization of the benefits of this type of operation. The width of right turn lanes should desirably be equal to the normal through lane width for the facility. In low-speed areas, a minimum width of 10 ft (3.0 m) may be provided. Additional lane width should be provided when the right turn lane is adjacent to a curb.

160

CHAPTER TWO

TABLE 2.27

Storage Length at Intersections

Average no. of vehicles per cycle*

Required length, ft

Required length, m

Average no. of vehicles per cycle*

Required length, ft

Required length, m

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

50 100 150 175 200 250 275 325 350 375 400 450 475 500 525 550

15 30 46 53 61 76 84 99 107 114 122 137 145 152 160 168

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

600 625 650 675 725 750 775 800 825 975 1125 1250 1400 1550 1700 1850

183 190 198 206 221 229 236 244 251 297 343 381 427 472 518 564

*Average vehicles/cycle [DHV (turning lane)]/(cycles/hour) If cycles/hour are unknown, assume: Unsignalized or 2-phase—60 cycles per hour 3-phase—40 cycles per hour 4-phase—30 cycles per hour Source: Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission.

Double Right Turn Lanes. Double right turn lanes are rarely used. When they are justified, it is generally at an intersection involving either an off-ramp or a one-way street. Double right turn lanes require a larger intersection radius [usually 75 ft (23 m) or more] and a throat width comparable to a double left turn (Fig. 2.39). Additional Through Lanes. Normally, the number of through lanes at an intersection is consistent with the number of lanes on the basic facility. Occasionally, through lanes are added on the approach to enhance signal design. As a general suggestion, enough main roadway lanes should be provided that the total through plus turn volume does not exceed 450 vehicles per hour per lane. Recovery Area at Curbed Intersections. When a through lane becomes a right-turnonly lane at a curbed intersection, an opposite-side tapered recovery area should be considered. The taper should be long enough to allow a trapped vehicle to escape, but not so long as to appear like a merging lane. Taper lengths may vary from 200 to 250 ft (61 to 76 m) depending on design speed. Pedestrians. Whenever sidewalks approach a curbed intersection, curb ramps must be provided, lining up with the crosswalks. At signalized intersections, when pedestrians are moving concurrently with traffic on one of the phases, sufficient time must be provided on the phase to allow pedestrians to cross the intersection. This is especially significant on intersections with large radii or multiple through lanes. There may be situations where pedestrian volumes will require a separate phase of the signal to be dedicated to their passage.

161 125′ 175′ 225′ 285′ 345′

40 mi/h 45 mi/h 50 mi/h 55 mi/h 60 mi/h 75′ 125′ 145′ 164′ 181′

L2

FIGURE 2.38 Layout for double left turn lanes with lateral offsets. Conversions: 1 mi/h 1.609 km/h, 1 ft 0.305 m. (From Location and Design Manual, Vol. 1, Roadway Design, Ohio Department of Transportation, with permission)

L1

Design speed

162

CHAPTER TWO

* Calculate F to determine a and b as follows: F = (W – 24)/2 F a b = 1.5 PH

FS =

(W + PV) TAN δ + CaB + PP > = 2.0 PH

FS = (W + PV) TAN δ + CaB

Vertical stem

PA

W PV

Toe of slab

Cantilever

Moments about toe: Wa > 1.5 FS = PHb – PVe =

Check R at different horizontal planes for gravity walls.

PH

Semigravity PP

LOCATION OF RESULTANT Moments about toe: Wa + PVe – PHb d= W + PV

R

PP F

Ht

PH Heel of slab

Base of footing Soil pressure

For coefficients of friction between base and soil see Table 8.2. Ca = Adhesion between soil and base TAN δ = Friction factor between soil and base W = Includes weight of wall and soil in front for gravity and semigravity walls. Includes weight of wall and soil above footing, for cantilever and counterfort walls.

Counterfort W Counterfort

A

PA PV

PH A

R

PP F

Section A–A FIGURE 8.21 Design criteria for rigid retaining walls. (From Design Manual, Part 4, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Harrisburg, Pa., with permission)

693

RETAINING WALLS TABLE 8.3 Relationship between Soil Backfill Type and Wall Rotation to Mobilize Active and Passive Earth Pressures behind Rigid Retaining Walls Wall rotation, /H Soil type and condition

Active

Passive

Dense cohesionless Loose cohesionless Stiff cohesive Soft cohesive

0.001 0.004 0.010 0.020

0.020 0.060 0.020 0.040

Source: From Design Manual, Part 4, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Harrisburg, Pa., with permission.

8.4.5 Design Procedures for a Cantilever Retaining Wall A typical cantilever retaining wall is illustrated by the insert sketch in Fig. 8.21. This rigid-type wall can be constructed with or without a base shear key (see Fig. 8.20) depending on an analysis for resistance to sliding, as discussed later. The specifications of the owner will govern the selection and use of backfill materials behind retaining walls. In most cases, clean backfill materials having an internal friction angle of at least 34° are assumed in the design of retaining walls, subject to the following considerations: 1. With a proper drainage system and with backfilling controlled so that no compaction-induced lateral loads are applied to the wall, the above-noted or better material may be used in construction. A minimum lateral earth pressure of 30 (lb/ft2)/ft (4.7 kN/m3) (equivalent fluid weight) for level backfills, or 40 (lb/ft2)/ft (6.3 kN/m3) for 2:1 sloped fills, should be assumed. 2. Backfill is assumed as on-site inorganic material; however, if it is of a lower class designation, the wall must be designed for an equivalent fluid weight lateral pressure suitable for that class. Therefore, should the designer select a backfill material of lower classification, it will be necessary to clearly specify the backfill material by a supplemental project special provision and to use an appropriate equivalent fluid weight lateral pressure for design. The design aids provided in Figs. 8.22 and 8.23 may be used for preliminary dimensions in the design of a cantilever cast-in-place retaining wall. On the basis of the Rankine theory of earth pressure, final design may proceed with the following steps: 1. Obtain soil parameters for both backfill and foundation. Usually the cohesionless backfill is slightly larger than Rankine zone. This enables the designer to use the properties of backfill material to estimate earth loads; otherwise the properties of retained material must be used. 2. Determine the appropriate design cases and load combinations. Load types are designated as follows: D, dead load; E, earth load; SC, surcharge; RI, rail impact; and W, wind load. Typical load combinations are as follows: sloped or leveled fill without rail, D E; leveled fill without rail, D E SC; leveled fill with rail, D E RI; and leveled fill with rail and fence, D E SC W. 3. Determine the overall design height including footing thickness T and stem height H, and select a trial footing width dimension B. (See Fig. 8.20.) Usually the toe

694

CHAPTER EIGHT

Wall w/ level fill w/ 2′ surcharge and rail Wall w/ 2:1 slope fill

Shear key depth (in)

Footing width (ft)

15

Fill height at stem

10

Depth of footing

20 18

5 Shear key depth

0

0

10

20 Wall height at stem (ft)

12 10 9 6

30

NOTES: Class I backfill (see Fig. 8.41) Class D concrete Coef. of friction (soil to soil = 0.67, soil to concrete = 0.42) FIGURE 8.22 Aid for preliminary design of cast-in-place concrete retaining walls showing wall and footing dimensions. (From Bridge Design Manual, Section 5, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

width b is approximately one-third to one-half of B. The ratio of footing width to overall height should be in the range from 0.4 to 0.8 for T-shaped walls as shown by the design aids in Figs. 8.22 and 8.23. In these preliminaries, wide-base L-shaped walls (footing width to height ratios larger than 0.8) are used for low wall heights (less than 10 ft or 3 m), and the factor of safety with respect to overturning is relaxed from a minimum of 2.0 to 1.5 when considering the case of D E RI. 4. Draw a vertical line from the back face of the footing to the top of the fill. This line serves as the boundary of the free body to which the earth pressure is applied. The applied active earth pressure can be estimated by Rankine theory, and the direction assumed parallel to the backfill surface. Compute the resultant P of the applied earth pressure and associated loads. Resolve P into horizontal and vertical components Ph and Pv, and apply at one-third the total height Ht of the imaginary boundary from the bottom of the footing. (See Fig. 8.21.) 5. Take a free body of the stem and compute the loads applied at the top of the stem as well as loads along the stem (height H), and find the moment and shear envelope to meet all the design cases at several points along the height. The working stress design method and the concept of shear friction can be used to calculate the shear strength at the joint between footing and stem.

695

RETAINING WALLS 600

6

500

5

400

4 Toe pressure (kips/ft 2 ) *

3

300

Steel (lb/ft)

Toe pressure (kips/ft 2), or concrete (yd 3/ft)

Wall w/ level fill w/ 2′surcharge and rail Wall w/ 2:1 slope fill * Loss of heel (10K impact applied)

200

2 Steel (lb/ft) Concrete (yd3/ft)

100

1

0

0

10 20 Wall height at stem (ft)

0 30

NOTES: Class I backfill (see Fig. 8.41) Class D concrete Coef. of friction (soil to soil = 0.67, soil to concrete = 0.42) FIGURE 8.23 Aid for preliminary design of cast-in-place concrete retaining walls showing toe pressure and steel and concrete quantities. (From Bridge Design Manual, Section 5, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

6. Calculate the weight W, which is the sum of the weight of concrete and the weight of soil bounded by the back of the concrete wall and the vertical line defined by step 4 above. Find the distance from the extremity of the toe to the line of action of W, which is the stabilizing moment arm a. 7. Calculate the overturning moment M o applied to the wall free body with respect to the tip of the toe as:

冢冣

Ht M o P h 3

(8.5)

Calculate the resisting moment Mr with respect to the tip of the toe as: Mr Wa Pv B

(8.6)

The safety factor SF against overturning is Mr SF (overturning) Mo W a Pv B P h Ht / 3

(8.7)

696

CHAPTER EIGHT

The required safety factor (overturning) should be equal to or greater than 2.0 unless otherwise accepted and documented by the engineer (see step 3). 8. Compute the eccentricity e of the applied load with respect to the center of the footing based on the net moment: Mr Mo B e 2 W

(8.8)

The resultant should be within the middle third of the footing width; i.e., the absolute value of e should be less than or equal to B/6 to avoid tensile action at the heel. 9. The toe pressure q can be evaluated and checked by the following equation:

冤

冢冣冥

W e q 1 6 B B

(8.9)

The toe pressure must be equal to or less than the allowable bearing capacity based on the soils report. Toe pressure is most effectively reduced by increasing the toe dimension. 10. The footing, both toe and heel, can be designed by working strength design. Soil reactions act upward and superimposed loads act downward. The heel design loads should include the portion of the vertical component Pv of earth pressure that is applied to the heel. For the toe design loads and stability, the weight of the overburden should not be used if this soil could potentially be displaced at some time during the life of the wall. 11. Check the factor of safety against sliding without using a shear key. The coefficient of friction between soil and concrete is approximately tan ( 2⁄3), where is the internal friction angle of the soil in radians. Neglect the passive soil resistance in front of the toe. The sliding resistance SR can be evaluated as:

冢冣

2 SR (W Pv) tan 3

(8.10)

The SF (sliding), which is SR/Ph, should be equal to or greater than 1.5. If SF (sliding) is less than 1.5, then either the width of the footing should be increased or a shear key should be installed at the bottom of the footing. If a shear key is the choice, the depth of the inert block dc is computed by the sum of the key depth KD and the assumed effective wedge depth, which is approximately half the distance between the toe and the front face of the shear key (b/2). Using the inert block concept, knowing the equivalent fluid weight (p) of passive soil pressure, and neglecting the top 1 ft (300 mm) of the toe overburden To, the toe passive resistance Pp is Pp 0.5p[(To T dc 1)2 (To T 1)2]

(8.11)

Total sliding resistance F from friction is the sum of the horizontal component of the resistance from toe to shear key and the resistance from shear key to heel. Therefore: F [cos2 ( 2⁄3 ) R1 tan ] R2 tan ( 2⁄3 )

(8.12)

697

RETAINING WALLS

where internal friction angle of base soil R1 soil upward reaction between toe and key, lb/ft (kN/m) R2 soil upward reaction between key and heel, lb/ft (kN/m) Sliding resistance is SR F Pp

(8.13)

The SF (sliding), which is SR/Ph , should be equal to or greater than 1.5. 12. Repeat steps 3 through 11 as appropriate until all design requirements are satisfied. Figure 8.24 represents typical values for equivalent fluid pressures of soils. These values are suggested for use in the absence of a more detailed determination.

Structural backfill class designation

Type of soil (compaction conforms with AASHTO 90–95% T180)

Typical values for equivalent fluid unit weight of soils, lb/ft3a,b,c (kN/m3) Condition

Level backfill

2:1 (H:V ) backfill

(Active) (At rest)

40 55

50 (6.3/7.9) 65 (8.6/10)

Medium dense sand or (Active) gravel (At rest)

35 50

45 (5.5/7.1) 60 (6.3/9.4)

Densee sand or gravel, 95% T180

(Active) (At rest)

30 45

40 (4.7/6.3) 55 (7.1/8.6)

Class IIAf: on-site, inorganic, coarsegrained soils, low percentage of fines

Compacted, clayed, sand gravel

(Active) (At rest)

40 60

50 (6.3/7.9) 70 (9.4/11)

Compacted, clayed, silty gravel

(Active) (At rest)

45 70

55 (7.1/8.6) 80 (11/13)

Class IIB: onsite, inorganic LL < 50%

Compacted, silty/sandy gravelly, low/medium plasticity lean clay

Class IIC: onsite, inorganic LL > 50%

Fat clay, elastic silt that can become saturated

Class Id: borrowed, selected, coarsegrained soils

Loose sand or gravel

Site-specific material, use with special attention; see geotechnical engineer. Soils report on workmanship of compaction, drainage design, and waterstop membrane is required. Not recommended

a At

rest, pressure should be used for earth that does not deflect or move. pressure state is defined by movement at the top of wall of 1/240 of the wall height. c The effect of additional earth pressure that may be induced by compaction or water should be added to that of earth pressure. d Class I: 30 percent or more retained on no. 4 sieve and 80 percent or more retained on no. 200 sieve. e Dense: No less than 95 percent density per AASHTO T180. f Class IIA: 50 percent or more retained on no. 200 sieve. b Active

FIGURE 8.24 Typical values for equivalent fluid pressure for soils. (From Bridge Design Manual, Section 5, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

698

CHAPTER EIGHT

8.5 MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH WALLS 8.5.1 Types of MSE Walls Mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are made up of several elements—specifically, the reinforcement of a soil mass through the use of steel strips, steel or polymeric grids, or geotextile sheets, capable of withstanding tensile forces, and a facing material. Figure 8.25 depicts different types of geosynthetic reinforced walls. The walls depicted range from a sloping geotextile wrapped face, usually used for the more temporary

Vertical geotextile facing

Sloping gunite or structural facing

Sloping geotextile facing

Vertical precast concrete element facing

Sloping soil and vegetation facing

Geotextile gabion

Vertical cast-in-place concrete/masonry facing

Vertical masonry facing

FIGURE 8.25

Facings for geotextile-reinforced walls.

RETAINING WALLS

699

conditions, to stabilized soil masses faced with more long-term cast-in-place concrete or masonry block facings. The advantages of MSE walls over the more conventional reinforced concrete walls include 1. 2. 3. 4.

Inherent flexibility to accommodate reasonable differential settlements Lower total cost Less construction time Inherent capability to provide drainage to avoid buildup of hydrostatic forces

The reinforcement elements are characterized as extensible or inextensible. Extensible reinforcements can deform without rupture to develop deformations greater than can the soil in which they are placed. Such reinforcements include polymeric geotextiles and geogrids. Inextensible reinforcements cannot deform to deformations greater than the soil they reinforce. Metallic-strip or grid reinforcements are included in this category. A summary of the available MSE systems in terms of the reinforcement and facing panel details is included in Table 8.4. The summary includes the major proprietary systems available. Figure 8.26 includes data regarding the geometries and some mechanical properties of the different reinforcement types available for use in MSE walls with geotextile reinforcements. Reinforced Earth was invented by Henri Vidal, who first published results of his studies in 1963. After a brief period of skepticism, the first significant projects were constructed in 1967. The use of Reinforced Earth then spread rapidly, and by the early 1970s many significant projects were in place in several countries. These included the 23-m-high Peyronnet wall on the Nice-Menton Highway and the coal and ore loading facility at the port of Dunkirk, in France; the major retaining walls built along California Route 39 and along Interstate 70 through Vail Pass in the Colorado Rocky Mountains, in the United States; the Henri Bourassa Interchange in Quebec City, Canada; the several retaining walls on the Bilbao-Behobia Expressway in Spain; and the 11-km-long wall built on the St. Denis coastal road on Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean. Subsequently, Reinforced Earth has been accepted by civil engineers in all of the world’s industrialized nations, and its uses have been greatly diversified. Predominant applications are highway and railway retaining walls and bridge abutments. As indicated in Table 8.4, several other systems have been used since the introduction of Reinforced Earth. The Hilfiker retaining wall, which uses welded wire reinforcement and facing, was developed in the mid-1970s, and the first experimental wall was built in 1975 to confirm its feasibility. The first commercial use was on a wall built for the Southern California Edison Power Company in 1977 for repair of roads along a power line in the San Gabriel Mountains. In 1980, the use of welded wire wall expanded to larger projects, and, over the years, numerous walls have been completed in the United States. Hilfiker also developed the Reinforced Soil Embankment (RSE) system, which uses continuous welded wire reinforcement and a precast-concrete facing system. The first experimental Reinforced Soil Embankment system was constructed in 1982. The first use of RSE on a commercial project was in 1983, on State Highway 475 near the Hyde Park ski area northeast of Santa Fe, New Mexico. At that site, four reinforced soil structures were constructed totaling 17,400 ft2 (1600 m2) of wall face. Many additional RSE systems have been constructed since. A system using strips of steel grid (or “bar mat”) reinforcement, VSL Retained Earth, was first constructed in the United States in 1981 in Hayward, California. Since then, numerous VSL Retained Earth projects have been built in the United States.

700

CHAPTER EIGHT

TABLE 8.4 Reinforcement and Face Panel Details for Several Reinforced Soil Systems Used in North America System name

Reinforcement detail

Typical face panel detail*

Reinforced Earth (The Reinforced Earth Company, 1700 N. Moore St., Arlington, VA 22209-1960)

Galvanized ribbed steel strips, 0.16 in (4 mm) thick; 2 in (50 mm) wide. Epoxycoated strips also available.

VSL Retained Earth (VSL Corporation, 101 Albright Way, Los Gatos, CA 95030)

Rectangular grid of W11 or W20 plain steel bars, 24-in 6-in (61-cm 15-cm) grid. Each mesh may have 4, 5, or 6 longitudinal bars. Epoxy-coated meshes also available. Rectangular grid, nine 3⁄8-indiameter (9.5-mm) plain steel bars on 24-in 6-in (61-cm 15-cm) grid. Two bar mats per panel (connected to the panel at four points). Rectangular grid of five 3⁄8-indiameter (9.5-mm) plain steel bars on 24-in 6-in (61-cm 15-cm) grid, 4 bar mats per panel. Welded wire mesh, 2-in 6-in (5-cm 15-cm) grid of W4.5 W3.5 (0.24 in 0.21 in diameter), W7 W3.5 (0.3 in 0.21 in), W9.5 W4 (0.34 in 0.23 in), and W12 W5 (0.39 in 0.25 in) in 8-ft-wide mats. 6-in 24-in (15-cm 61-cm) welded wire mesh: W9.5 W20—0.34 to 0.505 in (8.8 to 12.8 mm) diameter. Nonmetallic polymeric grid mat made from high-density polyethylene or polypropylene.

Facing panels are cruciform shaped precast concrete 4.9 ft 4.9 ft 5.5 in (1.5 m 1.5 m 14 cm). Half-size panels used at top and bottom. Precast concrete panel. Hexagon shaped, 591⁄2 in high, 683⁄8 in wide between apex points, 6.5 in thick (1.5 m 1.75 m 16.5 cm).

Mechanically stabilized embankment (Calif. Dept. of Transportation, Div. of Engineering Services, 5900 Folsom Blvd., P.O. Box 19128, Sacramento, CA 95819) Georgia stabilized embankment (Dept. of Transportation, State of Georgia, No. 2 Capitol Square, Atlanta, GA 30334-1002) Hilfiker retaining wall (Hilfiker Retaining Walls, PO Drawer L, Eureka, CA 95501) and Lane retaining wall (Lane Enterprises, Inc., P.O. Box 345, Pulaski, PA 16143)

Reinforced Soil Embankment (The Hilfiker Company, 3900 Broadway, Eureka, CA 95501) Tensar Geogrid system (The Tensar Corporation, 1210 Citizens Parkway, Morrow, GA 30260)

Miragrid system (Mirafi, Inc., P.O. Box 240967, Charlotte, NC 28224)

Nonmetallic polymeric grid made of polyester multifilament yarns coated with latex acrylic.

Precast concrete; rectangular 12.5 ft (3.81 m) long, 2 ft (61 cm) high, and 8 in (20 cm) thick.

Precast concrete panel; rectangular 6 ft (1.83 m) wide, 4 ft (1.22 m) high with offsets for interlocking. Welded wire mesh, wraparound with additional backing mat and 1.4-in (6.35-mm) wire screen at the soil face (with geotextile or shotcrete, if desired).

Precast concrete unit 12 ft 6 in (3.8 m) long, 2 ft (61 cm) high. Cast-in-place concrete facing also used. Nonmetallic polymeric grid mat (wraparound of the soil reinforcement grid with shotcrete finish, if desired), precast concrete units. Precast concrete units or grid wrap around soil.

(Continued)

701

RETAINING WALLS

TABLE 8.4 Reinforcement and Face Panel Details for Several Reinforced Soil Systems Used in North America (Continued) System name

Reinforcement detail

Maccaferri Terramesh system (Maccaferri Gabions, Inc., 43A Governor Lane Blvd., Williamsport, MD 21795) Geotextile reinforced system

Continuous sheets of galvanized double-twisted woven wire mesh with PVC coating. Continuous sheets of geotextiles at various vertical spacings.

Typical face panel detail* Rock fill gabion baskets laced to reinforcement. Continuous sheets of geotextiles wrapped around (with shotcrete or gunite facing). Others possible.

*Many other facing types are possible with any specific system. Source: From J. K. Mitchell and B. R. Christopher, “North American Practice in Reinforced Soil Systems,” Proceedings, Specialty Conference on Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures, Geotechnical Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1990, with permission.

The mechanically stabilized embankment, a bar mat system, was developed by the California Department of Transportation on the basis of its research studies starting in 1973 on Reinforced Earth walls. The first wall using this bar mat type of reinforcement system was built near Dunsmuir, California, about 2 years later. Here, two walls were built for the realignment and widening of highway I-5. Since then, California has built numerous reinforced soil walls of various types. Another bar mat reinforcing system, the Georgia stabilized embankment system, was developed more recently by the Georgia Department of Transportation, and the first wall using its technology was built for abutments at the I-85 and I-285 interchange in southwest Atlanta. Many additional walls have been constructed using this system. Polymeric geogrids for soil reinforcement were developed after 1980. The first use of geogrid in earth reinforcement started in 1981. Extensive marketing of geogrid products in the United States was started about 1983 by the Tensar Corporation. Since then, many projects have been constructed using this type of reinforcement. The use of geotextiles in reinforced soil walls started after the beneficial effect of reinforcement with geotextiles was noticed in highway embankments over weak subgrades. The first geotextile reinforced wall was constructed in France in 1981, and the first structure of this type in the United States was constructed in 1974. Since about 1980, the use of geotextiles in reinforced soil has increased significantly.

8.5.2 Facing Systems The types of facing elements used in the different reinforced soil systems control their aesthetics, since they are the only visible parts of the completed structure. A wide range of finishes and colors can be provided in the facing. In addition, the facing provides protection against backfill sloughing and erosion, and provides drainage paths. The type of facing influences settlement tolerances. In multianchored structures, the facing is a major structural element. Major facing types include the following: 1. Segmental precast-concrete panels. Examples of these are found in Reinforced Earth, the Georgia stabilized embankment system, the California mechanically stabilized embankment system, the VSL Retained Earth system, the Hilfiker

702

CHAPTER EIGHT

Metal strips

TYPE

TYPICAL MECHANICAL PROPERTIES J MODULUS* (kN/m)

TYPICAL 50 mm 4mm

TENSILE† CAPACITY (kN/m)

STIFFNESS RATIO (SV=0.6m) (kN/m/m)

Ribbed smooth

830,000

540

90,000

Bar mat (strip)

80,000– 90,000

60

40,000– 60,000

Welded wire mesh (continuous sheet)

10,000– 40,000

10–30

17,000– 67,000

20,000

300

3,000

2,000– 10,000

20–30

3,000– 16,000‡

≈8 mm 150 mm

Metal grid

620 mm

3–6 mm 150 mm

Woven wire grid Polymer strip

150 mm

90 mm 4 mm 620 mm 40 mm

Woven wire mesh (continuous sheet)

J represents the modulus in terms of force per unit width of the reinforcement. * J = E(A c /b) where: A c = total cross section of reinforcement material b = width of reinforcement E = modulus of material †

Allowable values with no reduction for durability considerations

‡ Confined

FIGURE 8.26 Types of reinforcement and mechanical properties. (From J. K. Mitchell and B. R. Christopher, “North American Practice in Reinforced Soil Systems,” Proceedings, Specialty Conference on Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures, Geotechnical Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1990, with permission)

703

RETAINING WALLS TYPE

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES TENSILE† CAPACITY (kN/m)

STIFFNESS RATIO (SV = 0.6m)

75–2,000

5–50

125–3,000

2–800‡

2–25

3–1,300

75–10,000

5–40

125–17,000

J MODULUS* (kN/m)

(kN/m/m)

Extruded (15–100-mm openings)

Metal grid

Punched (5–50-mm openings)

Connected strips or strands (5–50-mm openings)

Metal grid

Nonwoven

FIGURE 8.26

Woven

(Continued)

Reinforced Soil Embankment, Tensar GeoWall, the American Geo-Tech system, the Stress Wall systems, the TRES system, the WEBSOL system, the Tensar system, and the York system of the Department of Environment, United Kingdom. (See Fig. 8.27.) 2. Cast-in-place concrete, shotcrete, or full-height precast panels. This type of facing is available in the Hilfiker and Tensar systems. Shotcrete is the most frequently used system for permanent soil nailed retaining structures. (See Fig. 8.28.) 3. Metallic facings. The original Reinforced Earth system had facing elements of galvanized steel sheet formed into half cylinders. Although precast concrete panels are now usually used in Reinforced Earth walls, metallic facings are still used in structures where difficult access or difficult handling requires lighter facing elements. Preformed metallic facings are also used in some soil nailing systems.

704

CHAPTER EIGHT

FIGURE 8.27 Sloping or vertical wall with reinforcement attached to precast-concrete facing elements.

FIGURE 8.28 Vertical wall with cast-in-place concrete facing. Reinforcement is wrapped around fill used for drainage.

4. Welded wire grids. Wire grid can be bent up at the front of the wall to form the wall face. This type of facing is used in the Hilfiker and Tensar retaining wall systems. Welded wire grid facing is also commonly used with soil nailing in fragmented rocks or intermediate soils (chalk, marl, shales). 5. Gabion facing. Gabions (rock-filled wire baskets) can be used as facing with reinforcing strips consisting of welded wire mesh, welded bar mats, polymer geogrids, or the double-twisted woven mesh used for gabions placed between the gabion baskets. 6. Fabric facing. Various types of geotextile reinforcement are looped around at the facing to form the exposed face of the retaining wall. These faces are susceptible to ultraviolet light degradation, vandalism (e.g., target practice), and damage due to fire. 7. Plastic grids. A plastic grid used for the reinforcement of the soil can be looped around to form the face of the completed retaining structure in a similar manner to welded wire mesh and fabric facing. Vegetation can grow through the grid structure and can provide both ultraviolet light protection for the polymer and a pleasing appearance.

705

RETAINING WALLS

8. Postconstruction facing. For wrapped faced walls, whether geotextiles, geogrids, or wire mesh, a facing can be attached after construction of the wall by shotcreting, guniting, or attaching prefabricated facing panels made of concrete, wood, or other materials. Shotcrete is the most frequently used system for permanent soil nailed retaining structures. Precast elements can be cast in several shapes and provided with facing textures to match environmental requirements and to blend aesthetically into the environment. Retaining structures using precast-concrete elements as the facings can have surface finishes similar to any reinforced concrete structure. In addition, the use of separate panels provides the flexibility to absorb differential movements, both vertically and horizontally, without undesirable cracking, which could occur in a rigid structure. Retaining structures with metal facings have the disadvantage of shorter life because of corrosion unless provision is made to compensate for it. Facings using welded wire or gabions have the disadvantages of an uneven surface, exposed backfill materials, more tendency for erosion of the retained soil, possible shorter life from corrosion of the wires, and more susceptibility to vandalism. These can, of course, be countered by providing shotcrete or hanging facing panels on the exposed face and compensating for possible corrosion. The greatest advantages of such facings are low cost; ease of installation; design flexibility; good drainage (depending on the type of backfill), which provides increased stability; and possible treatment of the face for vegetative and other architectural effects. The facing can easily be adapted and well blended with the natural environment in the countryside. These facings, as well as geosynthetic wrapped facings, are especially advantageous for construction of temporary or other short-term design life structures. 8.5.3 Structure Dimensions MSE walls should be dimensioned as required by AASHTO. The soil reinforcement length must be at least 70 percent of the wall height, as measured from the leveling pad, but not less than 8 ft (2.4 m) for both strip and grid type reinforcement. AASHTO requires the reinforcement length to be uniform throughout the entire height of the wall. The specification does allow deviation from this uniform length requirement, subject to the availability of substantiating evidence. MSE walls must be designed for both external stability and internal stability. The recommended minimum factors of safety in various areas of external stability are noted in AASHTO as follows: External stability Overturning Ultimate bearing capacity Sliding Overall stability (deep-seated failure) Seismic (overturning and sliding)

Factor of safety 2.0 for footings on soil, 1.5 for footings on rock 2.5 for Group 1 loadings, 2.0 if justified by geotechnical analysis 1.5 1.5 for bridge abutment walls; 1.3 for walls with static loads; 1.1 for seismic loads 75% static safety factor

In lieu of the overturning check, the eccentricity e of the force resultant R must be located such that e L/6 where L is the base length (see Fig. 8.33). In calculating bearing

706

CHAPTER EIGHT

capacity, bearing pressures should be calculated using the Meyerhof distribution, which considers a uniform base pressure distributed over an effective base width of L 2e. Settlement should be investigated based on a geologic study. In regard to internal stability, AASHTO notes the following: Internal stability Pullout resistance Rupture strength reinforcement Durability Seismic stability

Factor of safety 1.5 Allowable tension [see Eqs. (8.14a) and (8.14b)] According to design life [see Eqs. (8.14a) and (8.14b) 75% static safety factor

Figures 8.29 and 8.30 indicate the two basic failure modes for internal stability analysis— specifically, rupture or creep failure of the reinforcement and a pullout failure mode. These failure modes suggest the use of the tied-back wedge analysis approach depicted in Fig. 8.31, which represents the basic method of analysis included in the AASHTO specifications. Reinforcement rupture Unstable soil mass

Stable soil mass

Failure surface Initial embedment beyond failure surface is retained Foundation

FIGURE 8.29

Reinforcement rupture or creep failure mode for internal stability evaluation.

Failure surface Unstable soil mass

Stable soil mass Reinforcement embedment is shortened as pullout occurs

Foundation

FIGURE 8.30

Reinforcement pullout failure mode for internal stability evaluation.

707

RETAINING WALLS q = uniform surcharge

zi

zm i Layer i – 1 FHi Pi

Layer i Le i

H L

Planar failure surface

D

Failure plane orientation 45° + φ/2 FIGURE 8.31

Parameters for tied-back wedge analysis.

8.5.4 Reinforced Fill Materials Well-graded, free-draining granular material is usually specified for permanent-placed soil reinforced walls. Lower-quality materials are sometimes used in reinforced embankment slopes. Experience with cohesive backfills is limited. However, low strength, creep properties, and poor drainage characteristics make their use undesirable. Some current research is focused on the use of cohesive soil backfills. The following gradation and plasticity limits have been established by the AASHTO-AGC-ARTBA* Joint Committee Task Force 27 for mechanically stabilized embankments: U.S. sieve size 4 in (100 mm) No. 40 No. 200

Percent passing 100 0–60 0–15

Plasticity index (PI) less than 6 percent

It it recommended that the maximum particle size be limited to 3⁄4 in (19 mm) for geosynthetics and epoxy-coated reinforcements unless tests show that there is minimal construction damage if larger particle sizes are used. Metallurgical slag or cinders should not be used except as specifically allowed by the designer. Material should be furnished that exhibits an angle of internal friction of 34° or more, as determined by AASHTO T-236, on the portion finer than the No. 10 sieve. The backfill material should be compacted to 95 percent of AASHTO T-99, method C or D, at optimum moisture content. See Art. 8.5.7 for backfill requirements that are important in relation to the durability of the steel reinforcement. On-site or local material of marginal quality can be used only with the discretion and approval of the designer. *AGC, Associated General Contractors; ARTBA, American Road and Transportation Builders Association.

708

CHAPTER EIGHT

8.5.5 Design Methodology for MSE Walls Figure 8.32 shows the general design equations given by AASHTO for MSE walls with a horizontal backslope and a traffic surcharge. Included is the calculation of safety factors for overturning and sliding, and the maximum base pressure. Inclusion of a traffic surcharge is required only in those instances where traffic loadings will actually surcharge the wall. Separate surcharge diagrams are applied for the two conditions shown. For stability of the mass, the traffic surcharge should act at the end of the reinforced zone so as to eliminate the “stabilizing” effect of this loading. However, for purposes of determining horizontal stresses, which are increased as a result of this surcharge, the loading is Assumed for bearing capacity and overall (global) stability comps.

q

q Reinforced soil mass r r Kr

Assumed for overturning and sliding resistance comps. Retained fill f f Kaf

F2 = q H Kaf V1 =

r

HL

F1 = 1/2

f

H2 Kaf H/3

CL

H/2

H

0 L B FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST OVERTURNING (MOMENTS ABOUT POINT 0): V1 (L/2) moments resisting (Mr) = FSOT = 2.0 F1 (H/3) + F2 (H/2) moments overturning (Mo) FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST SLIDING: V1 (tan or tan )* horizontal resisting force(s) = 1.5 F1 + F2 horizontal driving force(s) = friction angle of reinforced backfill or foundation, whichever is lowest

FSSL =

where q = traffic live load *tan is for continuous soil reinforcement (e.g., grids and sheets). For discontinuous soil reinforcements (e.g., strips) use tan . is the soil/ reinforcement interface friction angle. Use the lower of tan at the base of the wall or tan at the lowest reinforcement layer for continuous reinforcements. Note: For relatively thick facing elements (e.g., segmental concrete facing blocks), it may be desirable to include the facing dimensions and weight in sliding and overturning calculations (i.e., use B in lieu of L).

FIGURE 8.32 General design requirements for MSE walls with horizontal backfill and traffic surcharge. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2002, with permission)

709

RETAINING WALLS

deemed to apply over the entire surface of the wall backfill. Figure 8.33a and b shows the AASHTO equations for the sloping backfill case and the broken backfill case. While the conventional analysis of a mechanically stabilized earth wall assumes a rigid body, field evaluation has shown that the variation and magnitude of the foundation loading exerted by the wall on the underlying soil differ from the traditional trapezoidal

2/

h-H

3

Retained fill f f Kaf

L V2=

rL

(h-H) 2

Reinforced soil mass r r Kr 2

F1 =

1 /2 f h

K af

FV

h H

FH V1 =

rHL

h/3

CL 0 L B FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST OVERTURNING (MOMENTS ABOUT POINT 0): V1 (L/2) + V 2 (2L/3) + Fv (L) moments resisting (Mr) 2.0 = FSOT = moments overturning (Mo) FH (h/3) FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST SLIDING: (V1 + V 2 + Fv) (tan horizontal resisting force(s) = FSSL = horizontal driving force(s) FH

or tan )*

1.5

= friction angle of reinforced backfill or foundation, whichever is lowest *tan is for continuous soil reinforcements (e.g., grids and sheets). For discontinuous soil reinforcements (e.g., strips) use tan . is the soil/ reinforcement interface friction angle. Use the lower of tan at the base of the wall or tan at the lowest reinforcement layer for continuous reinforcements. Note: For relatively thick facing elements (e.g., segmental concrete facing blocks), it may be desirable to include the facing dimensions and weight in sliding and overturning calculations (i.e., use B in lieu of L). FIGURE 8.33a General design requirements for MSE walls with sloping backfill. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

710

CHAPTER EIGHT 2H I h-H

V2=

FL

(h-H) 2

2

Reinforced soil mass r r Kr

h

FV

H

Retained fill f f Kaf

V1 = rHL CL

F1

=

h 1 /2 f

K af

I FH h/3

0 L B FH = FT cos ( I ) FV = FT cos ( I ) For infinite slope I = Ka for retained fill using = = I: sin2 ( + ) Ka = sin( + ) sin( – I) sin2 sin( + ) 1 + sin( - ) sin( + I)

2

FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST OVERTURNING (MOMENTS ABOUT POINT 0): moments resisting (Mr) V1 (L/2) + V 2 (2L/3) + Fv (L) 2.0 = FSOT = moments overturning (Mo) FH (h/3) FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST SLIDING: (V1 + V 2 + Fv) (tan horizontal resisting force(s) = FSSL = horizontal driving force(s) FH

or tan )*

1.5

= friction angle of reinforced backfill or foundation, whichever is lowest *tan is for continuous soil reinforcements (e.g., grids and sheets). For discontinuous soil reinforcements (e.g., strips) use tan . is the soil/ reinforcement interface friction angle. Use the lower of tan at the base of the wall or tan at the lowest reinforcement layer for continuous reinforcements. Note: For relatively thick facing elements (e.g., segmental concrete facing blocks), it may be desirable to include the facing dimensions and weight in sliding and overturning calculations (i.e., use B in lieu of L). FIGURE 8.33b General requirements for MSE walls with broken backfill. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

pressure distribution assumed under reinforced-concrete cantilever walls. Tests were performed by placing pressure cells under the base of an MSE wall. The wall was the Fremersdorf wall constructed in Germany, which is depicted in Fig. 8.34 along with the bearing pressure recorded from the pressure cells. Tests on that structure demonstrated that loading is greater toward the front of the structure because of earth pressure imposed

711

RETAINING WALLS 6.20 m

= 18 kN/m 3

7.25 m W

P β

0 50 –

100 h

150 +

O

σv

O

σv

kPa

O

FIGURE 8.34 Fremersdorf MSE wall with foundation pressures from pressure cell readings. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

by the retained fill behind the wall. In addition, the total load was slightly greater than the total weight of the wall, indicating that the thrust behind the structure was inclined. The difference between total loading and weight, and the location of the resultant, made it possible to compute the thrust angle . The bearing pressure distribution from the Fremersdorf wall is idealized in the AASHTO equation for soil pressure ( v ) shown in Fig. 8.35. A uniform pressure (Meyerhof distribution) is calculated over a width equal to the length of the soil reinforcement elements minus 2 times the eccentricity of the vertical force.

8.5.6 Superimposed versus Terraced Structures There are instances when one MSE wall is built on top of another. In certain instances, these walls can be considered to be two independent structures, each requiring its own internal design and external stability. The global stability of the slope must be sufficiently stable so as not to undermine the stability of the entire embankment. Figure 8.36 shows a superimposed structure. The walls are such that the load of the upper wall level serves as a surcharge load on the lower wall. Each wall is independently designed.

712

CHAPTER EIGHT

Rv

2e

M

e

Z

σv L Meyerhof σ v =

Rv L – 2e

FIGURE 8.35 Foundation pressure for MSE wall calculated by the AASHTO method based on Meyerhof. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

FIGURE 8.36 Superimposed MSE walls. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

This design approach does not hold when the MSE structures are directly superimposed, one on another, as shown in Fig. 8.37. Such terraced arrangements are sometimes used for high walls. These offset structures are obviously similar to a single embankment with a sloping face. They exhibit essentially the same overall behavior, and are designed as sloping faced walls.

RETAINING WALLS

713

FIGURE 8.37 Terraced MSE wall. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

8.5.7 Durability Considerations for MSE Walls with Metal Reinforcement Where metallic reinforcement is used, the life of the structure will depend on the corrosion resistance of the reinforcement. Practically all the metallic reinforcements used in construction of embankments and walls, whether they are strips, bar mats, or wire mesh, are made of galvanized steel. Epoxy coating can be used for additional corrosion protection, but it is susceptible to construction damage, which can significantly reduce its effectiveness. PVC coatings on wire mesh also provide corrosion protection, provided again that the coating is not significantly damaged during construction. When PVC or epoxy coatings are used, the maximum particle size of the backfill should be restricted to 3⁄4 in (19 mm) or less to reduce the potential for construction damage. For the purpose of determining the sacrificial metal required (corrosion allowance), the following design life is provided, pursuant to recommendations of Task Force 27 of AASHTO-AGC-ARTBA: Structure classification

Design life, yr

Permanent structure Abutments Rail supporting structures Marine structures

75 100 100 75

The required cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement is calculated using the relationships given in Fig. 8.38 for the selected type of reinforcement (strips or grids). The corrosion loss assumed is based on the following. In 1985, an FHWA study was initiated to develop practical design and construction guidelines from a technical review of extensive laboratory and field tests on buried

714

CHAPTER EIGHT STEEL STRIPS

t*

b Ac = b • t*

Where t* = thickness corrected for corrosion loss Ac = cross section area

STEEL GRIDS

b

2

Ac = number of bars • π (d*) 4

Where d* = diameter of bar or wire corrected for corrosion loss

FIGURE 8.38 Metallic reinforcement for MSE walls showing correction for corrosion loss. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

metals. The results of this research were published in December 1990 in the Federal Highway Administration report FHWA-RD-89-186, “Durability/Corrosion of Soil Reinforced Structures”: For structures constructed with carefully selected and tested backfills to ensure full compliance with the electrochemical requirements, the maximum mass presumed to be lost per side due to corrosion at the end of the required service life may be computed by assuming a uniform loss model which considers the following loss rates: 1. Zinc corrosion rate for first 2 years: 15 m/yr 2. Zinc corrosion to depletion: 4 m/yr 3. Carbon steel rate: 12 m/yr The resulting sacrificial thickness for a 75-year life based on initial galvanization of 2 oz/ft2 (86 m) is approximately 1.5 mm of total sacrificial thicknesses. Since this is a maximum loss rate, it is presently assumed that the reduced minimum thickness remains proportional to tensile strength and therefore no further reduction is necessary. (See Fig. 8.39.) The select backfill materials shall meet the following requirements: Internal friction angle. The material shall exhibit an internal friction angle of not less than 34 degrees as determined by the standard direct shear test, AASHTO T-236, utilizing a sample of the material compacted to 95 percent of AASHTO T-99, Methods C or D (with oversize correction), at optimum moisture content. Internal friction angle testing is not required for

715 0

0.40

0.80

1.20

1.60

2.00

2.40

2.80

0

10

ta

da

16 20

S NB

AI &T

30

F

40

μm

50 60 Service life (yr)

Zinc

Carbon steel

(12

) /yr

70

75

80

Se e

n o te

90

data TAI ) & e NBS nvelop (e

1.77 mm

1.42 mm

5

(1

1.32 mm

A

AS

O HT

)

/yr

μm

Note: Recommended rate for years 75 to 100 = 7 μm/yr. (better fit of N.B.S. & TAI data)

s ion

at

nd

e mm

o

ec

Ar HW

)

pe

lo ve (en

AASHTO Zinc: same as above Carbon steel (after zinc): 15 μm/yr

FHWA RECOMMENDATIONS Zinc (first 2 years): 15 μm/yr Zinc (to depletion): 4 μm/yr Carbon steel (after zinc): 12 μm/yr

TAI & NBS DATA Δt = 2 sides × (25T0.88 – 88 μm) × K where K = 2.0

FIGURE 8.39 Maximum sacrificial thickness for calculating corrosion loss. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

88 μm

Maximum sacrificial thickness (mm)

100

(T)

1.77 mm 1.65 mm

2.02 mm

2.52 mm

716

CHAPTER EIGHT TABLE 8.5 Backfill Requirements Related to Durability of Steel Reinforcement Property

Requirement

Test method

Resistivity

Minimum 3000 cm, at 100% saturation Acceptable range 5–10 Maximum 100 ppm Maximum 200 ppm

California DOT 643

pH Chlorides Sulfates Source:

California DOT 643 California DOT 422 California DOT 417

From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission. 3

backfill materials that have at least 80 percent of the material greater than or equal to the ⁄4-in (19-mm) size. Soundness. The material shall be substantially free of shale or other soft, poor durability particles. The material shall have a magnesium sulfate soundness loss of less than 30 percent after four (4) cycles, as determined by AASHTO T-104. Electrochemical requirements. The material shall conform to the electrochemical requirements as described in Table 8.5. The Contractor shall furnish to the Engineer a Certificate of Compliance certifying that the select granular backfill material complies with this section of the specification. A copy of all test results performed by the Contractor, which are necessary to assure compliance with the specifications shall also be furnished to the Engineer. Backfill not conforming to this specification shall not be used without the written consent of the Engineer. The frequency of sampling of select granular backfill material, necessary to assure gradation control throughout construction, shall be as directed by the Engineer.

8.5.8 Durability Considerations for MSE Walls with Polymeric Reinforcement The durability of polymeric reinforcements is influenced by time, temperature, mechanical damage, stress levels, microbiological attack, and changes in the molecular structure due to radiation or chemical exposure. The effects of aging and of chemical and biological exposure are highly dependent on material composition, including resin type, grade, and additives; manufacturing process; and final product physical structure. Polymeric reinforcement, although not susceptible to corrosion, may degrade as a result of physicochemical activity in the soil, such as hydrolysis, oxidation, and environmental stress cracking. In addition, it is susceptible to construction damage, and some forms may be adversely affected by prolonged exposure to ultraviolet light. The durability of geosynthetics is a complex subject, and research is ongoing to develop reliable procedures for quantification of degradation effects. Moderate-strength geosynthetics have tensile strengths of about 100 lb/in (17.5 N/mm); some are now available that have strengths well over an order of magnitude higher. Current procedure to account for strength loss due to construction damage, and as a result of aging and chemical and biological attack, is to decrease the initial strength of the intact, unaged material for design. 8.5.9 Design Example of MSE Retaining Wall with Steel Reinforcement The following design example is provided with the permission of the Reinforced Earth Company. Typical calculations are shown, including the determination of allowable

717

RETAINING WALLS

Reinforcing strips

FIGURE 8.40 Cutaway view of typical Reinforced Earth retaining wall. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

reinforcement tension for galvanized steel reinforcing strips. Figure 8.40 shows a cutaway view of a typical Reinforced Earth retaining wall. Refer to Fig. 8.41 for illustration of calculation steps. Geometry Height of wall H 20 ft Strip length B 20 ft (AASHTO minimum 0.7H 14 ft) Soil Properties

R.E. material Random fill Foundation

Cohesion, c

Unit weight,

34.00° 25.00° 25.00°

— 0.100 kip/ft2 0.300 kip/ft2

0.125 kip/ft3 0.120 kip/ft3 —

Other Properties ●

Equivalent fill height for traffic surcharge of 0.25 kip/ft2 0.25 kip/ft2 3 2.08 ft 0.120 kip/ft

718

● ● ● ● ●

CHAPTER EIGHT

Maximum value of apparent coefficient of friction (bond) 1.50. Coefficient of friction at foundation level (sliding) 0.47. Surface area of one “A” panel 24.2 ft2. Maximum reinforcement tension 7.20 kips per strip. Stress at connection 100 percent of maximum tie tension.

General Calculations. Random fill is used outside the zone filled with R.E. (Reinforced Earth) material.

–2c Ka = 0.127 kips/ft2 Assumed active pressure diagram (used in this analysis)

H = 20′

Random fill γ = 0.120 kips/ft3 φ = 25° c = 0.10 kips/ft2

Limit of the R.E. volume

Actual active pressure diagram

γHKa – 2c Ka = 0.847 kips/ft2

B = 20′ strip length

(a)

Keq = 0.3528 0.25 × 0.3528 = 0.0882 kips/ft2 Live load surch. = 0.25 kips/ft 2

γ = 0.125 kips/ft3 F1

V1

F2

Point A γHKeq = 0.847 kips/ft2 (b) FIGURE 8.41 Design of Reinforced Earth retaining wall showing (a) active earth pressure, (b) addition of pressure from surcharge, (c) analysis at intermediate level, and (d) effective strip length. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

719

RETAINING WALLS 0.25 kips/ft2 Level 0.00

V1

11.39′

20.0′ 20′ (c)

= 10′

H 2

= 10′

H = 11.39′

0.3H = 6′

H 2

leff = 14.834′

(d) FIGURE 8.41

(Continued)

Pressure Coefficient for Random Fill. For the case of level ground at the top of the wall, a vertical backface, and neglecting the effect of wall friction, the pressure coefficient for the fill is given by

冢

Ka tan2 45° 2

冣

Substituting 25° gives

冢

冣

25° Ka tan2 45° 0.4059 2 To allow for the effects of cohesion in the fill (see Fig. 8.41b), define an equivalent pressure Keq such that K苶a HKeq HKa 2c兹苶 Thus eq 2c兹K 苶a苶 Keq Ka tan2 45° 2 H

冢

冣

720

CHAPTER EIGHT

Solving for eq, the equivalent soil friction angle can then be calculated as

冢

冪莦莦莦莦冣

冢

冪莦莦莦莦莦莦莦莦莦冣

eq 2 45° arctan

2 45° arctan

2c 兹K 苶a苶 Ka H

2 0.10 kip/ft 2 兹0 苶.4 苶0苶5苶9苶 0.4059 0.12 kip/ft3 20 ft

28.58° The calculation of the equivalent pressure coefficient follows as

冢

冣

25.58° Keq tan2 45° 0.3528 2 This coefficient is subsequently used to calculate F1, the horizontal force on the wall caused by the surcharge, and F2, the horizontal force on the wall caused by the fill. Vertical Loads and Resisting Moment. The vertical loads to be considered are the weight of the reinforced fill, V1, and of the surcharge, Vsurch. These loads are calculated and multiplied by their horizontal moment arm from the base (point A in Fig. 8.41b), and the results are summed to determine the resisting moment Mr. The sum of the vertical loads is designated Rv.

Load, kips/ft

Moment arm, ft

Resisting moment Mr , kips ft/ft

10 ft 10 ft

500 kips ft/ft 50 kips ft/ft Total Mr 550 kips ft/ft

V1 0.125 kip/ft3 20 ft 20 ft 50.0 kips/ft Vsurch 0.25 kip/ft2 20 ft 5.0 kips/ft Rv V1 Vsurch 50 5 55 kips/ft

Horizontal Forces and Overturning Moment. The horizontal force due to the surcharge, F1, and that due to the random fill, F2, are illustrated in Fig. 8.41b. They are calculated using the value of Keq determined previously and multiplied by their vertical moment arm from the base, and the results are summed to determine the overturning moment Mo.

Load, kips/ft F1 0.3528 0.250 kip/ft2 20 ft 1.764 kips/ft F2 0.3528 0.120 kip/ft3 (20 ft)2 (1⁄2) 8.47 kips/ft F1 F2 10.23 kips/ft

Moment arm, ft

Overturning moment Mo, kips ft/ft

10 ft

17.64 kips ft/ft

20 ft/3 6.67 ft

56.44 kips ft/ft Mo 74.08 kips ft/ft

721

RETAINING WALLS

Eccentricity e (without Surcharge). The eccentricity without surcharge must be calculated to make sure it is less than one-sixth of the base dimension B, which is the length of the reinforcing strip. Mr Mo B 20 500 74.08 1.4816 ft e 2 2 V1 50 B 20 e 3.33 ft 6 6

OK

Safety Factors. The safety factor against overturning is the ratio of the resisting moment to the overturning moment. The safety factor against sliding is the ratio of the horizontal resisting forces (weight of reinforced fill times friction factor plus foundation cohesion force) to the horizontal active forces. These safety factors must be calculated to make sure they are within limits. Mr 500 SF (overturning) 6.75 2.0 Mo 74.08

OK

V1 tan 25° c B SF (sliding ) F1 F2 50 tan 25° 0.3 20 2.87 1.50 10.23

OK

Eccentricity e (with Surcharge; Use Total Mr ). The eccentricity calculated with the surcharge should also be less than B/6. This value of e will be used to calculate the bearing pressure. Mr Mo B 20 550 74.08 e 1.347 ft 2 2 55 Rv Bearing Pressure. The bearing pressure v under the reinforced fill can be calculated from Meyerhof’s equation. The pressure must be within the allowable value for the site. V v B 2e 55 kips 3.18 kips/ft2 20 ft 2 1.347 ft Design at Intermediate Level. Design is illustrated for a level 11.39 ft below the top of the wall. (See Fig. 8.41c and d.) The same procedure is used for other levels. V1 0.25 kip/ft2 20 ft 0.125 kip/ft3 11.39 ft 20 ft 33.475 kips/ft Resisting moment 33.475 kips 10 ft 334.75 kips ft/ft

722

CHAPTER EIGHT

Overturning moment Mo 0.3528 [0.25 kip/ft2 (11.39)2 1⁄2 0.120 kip/ft3 (11.39)3 1⁄6] 16.15 kips ft/ft 334.75 Safety factor for overturning 20 2.0 16.15

OK

20 334.75 16.15 e 0.482 ft 2 33.475 20 e 3.33 ft 6

OK

33.475 kip V1 v 1.759 kips/ft2 20 ft

2 0.482 ft B 2e The pressure coefficient K is assumed to vary linearly between K0 (the coefficient of earth pressure at rest) at the top of the wall and Ka (the coefficient of active earth pressure) at a depth of 20 ft. Below a 20-ft depth, K Ka. The distance below the top of the wall is d. Maximum horizontal pressure Kv K0 1 sin 34° 0.4408

冢

冣

34° Ka tan2 45° 0.2827 2 K0 Ka K K0 d 20 ft 0.4408 0.2827 0.4408 11.39 ft 20 ft K 0.3508 h 0.3508 1.759 kips/ft2 0.617 kip/ft2 The area of a standard “A” panel is 24 ft2. Use four strips per panel. 0.617 24 Reinforcing strip tension 3.73 kips per strip 4 3.73 kips/strip 7.2 maximum tension for 75-yr design life

OK

(See subsequent calculations for maximum tension allowable for strip and connections.) Check length of strip: V 0.125 kip/ft2 11.39 ft 20 ft 28.475 kips (without surcharge)

723

RETAINING WALLS

Resisting moment 28.475 kips 10 ft 284.75 kips ft/ft Overturning moment Mo 16.15 kips ft 284.75 Safety factor for overturning 18 2.0 16.15

OK

20 284.75 16.15 e 0.567 ft 2 28.475 e

20

⁄6 3.33 ft

OK

28.475 kips v 1.509 kips/ft2 20 ft 2 0.567 ft h 0.3508 1.509 kips/ft2 0.5295 kip/ft2 T tension on an “A” panel h A 0.5295 kip/ft2 24.2 ft2 12.81 kips R frictional resistance of reinforcing strips 2b leff H f* N 2 1.97 where 2b 0.328 ft width of top and bottom surface of one strip 12 H 11.39 ft overburden leff 14.834 ft effective strip length 0.125 kip/ft3 f* 1.5 [(1.5 tan 34° 11.39 ft)/20 ft] 1.03 coefficient of apparent friction N 4 number of strips per panel R 0.328 ft 14.834 ft 11.39 0.125 kip/ft3 1.03 4 28.54 kips R 28.54 Effective length safety factor 2.23 1.5 T 12.81

OK

Design Summary at Intermediate Levels

Level, ft

Maximum horizontal stress,

Stress at facing, kips/ft2

2.00 4.01 6.47 8.93 11.39 13.85 16.31 18.77

0.21 0.31 0.42 0.52 0.62 0.70 0.79 0.86

0.21 0.31 0.42 0.52 0.62 0.70 0.79 0.86

Straps Reinforcing Horizontal per strip stress (bond), panel tension, kips kips/ft2 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4

1.29 2.50 3.39 4.21 3.73 4.26 4.76 5.22

0.11 0.21 0.32 0.43 0.53 0.62 0.71 0.79

Effective length safety factor

Strip length, ft

2.52 1.84 1.76 1.67 2.23 2.28 2.29 2.25

20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

724

CHAPTER EIGHT

Calculation of Allowable Reinforcement Tension. The following calculations show the determination of the allowable reinforcement tension for galvanized reinforcing strips in permanent mechanically stabilized earth structures. Allowable stresses in strips and components are based on the AASHTO Bridge Specifications. The allowable reinforcement tension is based on maintaining allowable hardware stresses to the end of a 75-year service life. After 75 years, the structure will continue to perform with reinforcement stresses that may or may not exceed allowable levels, depending on the soil environment and the applied reinforcement loads. The calculations are based on the following mechanical properties of the reinforcement components. ●

Reinforcing strips 50- 4-mm ribbed (1.97- 0.16-in) ASTM A572 grade 65 Fu 80 kips/in2 ( minimum tensile strength) Fy 65 kips/in2 (minimum yield point)

●

Tie strips 50- 3.0-mm (1.97- 0.12-in) ASTM A570 grade 50 Fu 65 kips/in2 Fy 50 kips/in2

●

Bolts ⁄2-in-diameter 11⁄4 inch long ASTM A325 1

To begin, consider the tie strips at a section where there are no bolt holes (Section A-A, Fig. 8.42). There are two 50- 3-mm tie strip plates with 2 oz/ft2 (86 m) of zinc. Calculate the life of the zinc coating (see Art. 8.5.7): 86 m 2 yr(15 m/yr) T 2 yr 16 yr 4 m/yr No carbon steel is lost until after depletion of the zinc. Next, calculate the carbon steel loss in the subsequent 59 years. (See Art. 8.5.7.) The thickness of the carbon steel loss on one side is determined as follows:

e 59 yr 12 m/yr 708 m on each exposed side The outside surfaces of the tie strip plates are in contact with soil; the inside surfaces are not in contact with soil. Therefore, use one-half the carbon steel loss rate for the inside surfaces. The sacrificial thickness of reinforcement during service life is determined from: ES 708 m 354 m 1062 m per plate The thickness of the reinforcement at end of service life is the nominal thickness minus the sacrificial thickness: EC En ES 3000 m 1062 m 1938 m per plate

725

RETAINING WALLS 1 2 ″φ

× 114 ″ A-325 bolt set (galvanized) B

A

50 × 3 mm A-570 Gr. 50 tie strip (galvanized)

C

C

A B 1 12

″ 3 12 ″

1 12

″

50 × 4 mm A-572 Gr. 65 reinforcing strip (galvanized)

Section A – A : gross section of tie strip Section B – B : net section of tie strip and reinforcing strip at bolt Section C – C : gross section of reinforcing strip FIGURE 8.42 Structural connection of reinforcing strip to facing panel. (From the Reinforced Earth Co., with permission)

The cross-sectional area at end of service life is found from: 2 plates 50 mm 1938 m/plate AS 0.300 in2 25.4 mm/in 25,400 m/in The allowable tensile stress is found from: FT 0.55Fy 0.55(50 kips/in2) 27 kips/in2 The allowable tension on reinforcement is: Tal FT AS 27 kips/in2 0.300 in2 8.10 kips per connection Now, consider the tie strips at a section through the bolt holes (Section B-B, Fig. 8.42). There are two 50- 3-mm tie strip plates with 2 oz/ft2 (86 m) of zinc. The diameter of each bolt hole is 9⁄16 in (14.3 mm). The life of the zinc is 16 years, as found in the calculation for Section A-A. Calculate the thickness of carbon steel loss over the subsequent 59 years:

e 708 m per exposed side

726

CHAPTER EIGHT

(See the preceding calculation for Section A-A.) Corrosion does not occur on the inside surfaces of the plates, because of protection provided by sandwiching the reinforcing strip. Thus, ES 708 m per plate Proceed with calculations for thickness at end of service life, cross-sectional area, allowable tensile stress, and allowable tension force: EC En ES 3000 m 708 m 2292 m per plate 2 plates (50 mm 14.3 mm) 2292 m/plate AS 0.254 in2 25.4 mm/in 25,400 m/in FT 0.50Fu 0.50(65 kips/in2) 32 kips/in2 Tal FT AS 32 kips/in2 0.254 in2 8.13 kips per connection Now, consider the reinforcing strip at a section through the bolt holes (Section B-B, Fig. 8.42). The reinforcing strip is 50 4 mm with 2 oz/ft2 (86 m) of zinc. The diameter of each bolt hole is 9⁄16 in (14.3 mm). No carbon steel is lost from reinforcing strip surfaces at the net section, because of the sandwiching protection by the tie strip. Thus, ES 0 EC En 4000 m or 4 mm 50 mm 14.3 mm 4 mm 0.221 in2 AS (25.4 mm/in)2 FT 0.50Fu 0.50(80 kips/in2) 40 kips/in2 Tal FT AS 40 kips/in2 0.221 in2 8.84 kips per connection The shear strength of each bolt is found as follows. Each bolt is 1⁄2 in 11⁄4 in, ASTM A325, galvanized. It is assumed that no carbon steel is lost from the bolt shank, because of sandwiching protection by the strips. The bolt head, nut, and washer have more than adequate metal for loss to corrosion. The allowable shear stress on the bolt (with threads excluded from the shear plane) is FV 1.4 19 kips/in2 27 kips/in2 allowable The nominal cross-sectional area of the 1⁄2-in-diameter bolt is 0.196 in2. The allowable force on each bolt, considering two shear planes, is Tal FV AS 27 kips/in2 0.196 in2 2 10.60 kips per connection A check shows that bearing strength does not control for this case. Next, consider the reinforcing strip at a section where there are no bolt holes (Section C-C, Fig. 8.42). The reinforcing strip is 50 4 mm, with 2 oz/ft2 (86 m) of zinc. The life of the zinc is 16 years, from previous calculations. Calculate the thickness of carbon steel loss over the subsequent 59 years.

e 708 m per exposed side (see previous calculations) ES 2 sides 708 m/side 1416 m

727

RETAINING WALLS

Calculations follow for the thickness of each reinforcing strip at the end of service life, cross-sectional area, allowable tensile stress, and allowable tensile force: EC En ES 4000 m 1416 m 2584 m 50 mm 2584 m AS 25,400 m/in 0.200 in2 25.4 mm/in FT 0.55FY 0.55(65 kips/in2) 36 kips/in2 Tal FT AS 36 kips/in2 0.200 in2 7.20 kips per connection Design Summary for Allowable Reinforcement Tension Component

Section

Allowable force, kips

Tie strip Tie strip Reinforcing strip Reinforcing strip Bolt

Main Through bolt holes Main Through bolt holes Shear planes

8.10 8.13 7.20 8.84 10.60

The least value controls the design. In this case, the allowable reinforcement tension (7.20 kips) is governed by the strength of the reinforcing strip at a section where there are no bolt holes. 8.5.10 Material Properties of Polymeric Reinforcement The tensile properties of polymeric reinforcement are subject to creep under load because properties of the materials are both time- and temperature-dependent. Also, the materials are subject to damage during the construction process and are affected by durability considerations such as aging. Furthermore, characteristics of geosynthetic products made from the same base polymer exhibit the normal variation of most manufactured products. The allowable long-term reinforcement strength (tension capacity) based on limit state criteria is Tult Tult Ta FS RFID RFCR RFD FS RF where

(8.14a)

Ta allowable limit state tensile load, load per unit width basis Tult ultimate tensile strength of reinforcement from wide-strip tensile test (ASTM D4595) for geotextile and geogrids, or rib tensile tests for geogrids (at a strain rate 10 percent/min); the value selected for Tult shall be the minimum average roll value (MARV) for the product to account for statistical variance in the material strength FS 1.5 (minimum) is an overall factor of safety to account for uncertainties in structure geometry, fill properties, reinforcement manufacturing variations, and externally applied loads RF a combined reduction factor (multiplication of RFID RFCR RFD ) RFID strength reduction factor to account for construction damage RFD strength reduction factor to prevent rupture of reinforcement due to chemical and biological degradation RFCR strength reduction factor to prevent long-term creep rupture of reinforcement

728

CHAPTER EIGHT

Values of RFID, RFCR, and RFD must be determined from the results of prescribed product specific tests, and RFID and RFD should be no less than 1.1 each. Alternatively, in lieu of product-specific tests, a default reduction factor RF for certain geosynthetic products that meet AASHTO minimum requirements may be used. The default reduction factor for “applications not having severe consequences should poor performance or failure occur” is 4.0 for permanent applications and 2.5 for certain temporary applications. The allowable connection strength (Tac) between the wall facing and the reinforcement on a load per unit reinforcement width basis is Tult CRs Tult CRu Tac FS FS RFc

(8.14b)

where RFc RFCR RFD (as defined previously); product-specific long-term degradation data at the environment shall be considered CRu reduction factor to account for reduced ultimate strength resulting from the connection CRs reduction factor to account for reduced strength due to connection pullout FS 1.5 (minimum) overall factor of safety as defined previously ASTM designation D4595, “Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Geotextiles by the Wide-Width Strip Method,” serves as a quality control test from which a “minimum average roll value (MARV)” is determined and certified by the manufacturer to the user of the product. The MARV value is a measure of the ultimate tensile strength of the polymeric material under the stated test conditions. As noted, the manufacturing process is subject to variation. The minimum value the manufacturer certifies must therefore meet or exceed the design minimum value. The manufacturer must also be able to meet this minimum value at a specific confidence level. The ASTM and the industry have adopted a 95 percent confidence level. A normal distribution of the test results is assumed. ASTM Designation D4595. Test method ASTM 4595, which is prescribed by AASHTO, covers the measurement of tensile properties of geotextiles using a widewidth strip specimen. The test is also applied to geogrids. A relatively wide specimen is gripped across its entire width in the clamps of a constant-rate-of-extension (CRE) type tensile testing machine operated at a prescribed rate of extension, applying a longitudinal force to the specimen until the specimen ruptures. The distinctive feature of this test is that the width of the specimen is greater than the length, and this tends to minimize the contraction (neck-down) effect that is present with other test methods for measuring strip tensile properties of geotextiles. It is believed that the test will provide a closer relationship to expected geotextile behavior in the field. Tensile strength, elongation, initial and secant modulus, and breaking toughness of the test specimen can be calculated from the results. The determination of the wide-width strip force-elongation properties of geotextiles provides design parameters for reinforcement applications such as reinforced MSE walls. D4595 may be used for acceptance testing of commercial shipments of geotextiles, although an individual owner may specify other acceptance criteria. This test method is generally used by manufacturers, but when it is not, it should be required by owners in order to provide supporting data for the manufacturer’s stated MARV. To the end user, MARV is a minimum value that exceeds design requirements.

729

RETAINING WALLS

To account for testing variation, the manufacturer is required to take a sufficient number of specimens per fabric swatch that the user may expect, at the 95 percent probability level, that the test result will not be more than 5.0 percent of the average above or below the true average of the swatch for both the machine and the cross-machine direction. The number of tests required to establish a MARV depends upon whether a reliable estimate of the coefficient of variation v of individual observation exists, in the laboratories of either the manufacturer or the end user. Specifically, when there is a reliable estimate of v based upon extensive past records for similar materials tested as directed in the method, the required number of specimens is calculated using the equation:

冢冣

tv n A

2

(8.15)

where n number of specimens (rounded upward to a whole number) v reliable estimate of coefficient of variation of individual observations on similar materials in user’s laboratory under conditions of single-operator precision, % t value of Student’s t for one-sided limits (see Table 8.6), a 95% probability level, and degrees of freedom associated with the estimate of v A 5.0 percent of average, the value of allowable variation When there is no reliable estimate of v for the manufacturer’s or user’s laboratory, the equation should not be used directly. Instead, specify the fixed number of six specimens each for the machine direction and the cross-machine direction tests. The number of specimens is calculated using v 7.4 percent of the average. This value for v is somewhat larger than usually found in practice. When a reliable estimate of v for the user’s laboratory becomes available, the above equation will usually require fewer than the fixed number of specimens. D4595 specifically includes formulas for determining the initial tensile modulus and the offset tensile modulus. Additionally, the formula for breaking toughness is included. The appendix to the designation contains graphical representations for the determination of the modulus values.

TABLE 8.6

Values of Student’s t for One-Sided Limits and 95% Probability

df

One-sided

df

One-sided

df

One-sided

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6.314 2.920 2.353 2.132 2.015 1.943 1.895 1.860 1.833 1.812

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

1.796 1.782 1.771 1.761 1.753 1.746 1.740 1.734 1.729 1.725

22 24 26 28 30 40 50 60 120 ∞

1.717 1.711 1.706 1.701 1.697 1.684 1.676 1.671 1.658 1.645

df degrees of freedom number of samples 1. Source: From Geotextiles magazine, with permission.

730

CHAPTER EIGHT

8.5.11 Design Example of MSE Retaining Wall with Geogrid Reinforcement The following design example (provided courtesy of Tensar Earth Technologies) illustrates an application of AASHTO specifications and the tieback wedge method of analysis. Step 1: Qualify Design Assumptions. Review plans, specifications, and available information to confirm feasibility, to determine if the information is adequate to continue with design, and to ascertain that the wall layout is clearly understood. Step 2: Define Parameters for Soil, Reinforcement, Geometry, and Loading. On the basis of the information provided, clearly state the design parameters and factors of safety that will be used for design. Provide a diagram for the geometry of the wall that will be designed indicating slopes above and below the wall, any surcharge loadings and their locations, magnitude and direction of application, and hydrostatic and seismic loading conditions. For this example, refer to Fig. 8.43 for geometry. Design parameters are as follows: 1. Soil Zone

′, °

c

, lb/ft3

Reinforced fill Retained fill Foundation

34 30 30

0 0 0

120 120 120

Allowable foundation bearing stress is 6000 lb/ft2. 1.82′ 3.5′

4′

250 lb/ft2

5′

12.5′

24.2°

W2

W3

29′

Pq Pa

11.3′

W1

17′

3.6°

20′ FIGURE 8.43 Design example of MSE retaining wall with geogrid reinforcement. (From Tensar Earth Technologies, with permission)

731

RETAINING WALLS

2. Groundwater: none 3. Surcharge: 250 lb/ft2 uniform 4. Seismic loading: none Step 3: Calculate External Stability. First calculate the coefficient of active earth pressure, Ka. The slope angle is zero above the wall because the slope levels before reaching the end of the reinforcement. Had the slope extended beyond the tail of the reinforcement, a trial wedge solution or infinite slope calculation would be required, depending on the distance of the slope extension. For the following calculation, refer to Art. 8.2.3 for equation and nomenclature: For ′ 30°, 0, 93.6° (face has 3.6° batter), 0: Ka 0.31. Minimum embedment length L ≈ 0.7H 0.7(29) 20.3 ft. Use 20 ft. Sum moments and forces about the toe of the wall and solve for external safety factors (SF) as follows: Item, Fig. 8.43

Force, lb

Moment arm, ft

Moment, ft lb

W1 W2 W3 W4 Pa Pq

69,600 3,750 2,099 875 21,502 2,635

10.91 14.15 20.07 20.07 11.33 17.00

759,336 53,075 42,127 17,661 243,613 44,795

Rv W1 W2 W3 76,325 lb Rh Pa Pq 24,137 lb Resisting moment M1 M2 M3 854,538 ft lb Overturning moment 243,613 44,795 288,408 ft lb SF overturning 854,538/288,408 2.96 2 .0 OK SF sliding RvCi tan 30°/Rh 76,325 0.5774/24,137 1.82 1.5 OK

The safety factor for sliding should be calculated in at least two locations: at the interface of the foundation and the reinforced fill, and at the lowest geogrid. In this case, Ci, the coefficient of interaction between the geogrid and the reinforced fill, is 1.0 according to test data supplied by the geogrid manufacturer. Because the reinforced fill is stronger than the foundation soils, the lowest safety factor for sliding is at the foundation interface. Next check bearing. The eccentricity of the vertical reaction is Mr Mot L L 20 872,188 288,408 e 2.35 2 6 2 76,325 Rv The maximum bearing stress is then Rv 76,325 v 4990 lb/ft2 6000 lb/ft2 20 2 2.35 L 2e

OK

All external safety factors are satisfied. Next, calculate internal safety factors for geogrid tension, pullout at face, and pullout past the Rankine failure plane.

732

Height, ft

26.67 23.35 20.00 16.67 14.00 11.34 9.34 7.34 6.00 4.67 3.34 2.00 0.67

13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

2.33 5.65 9.00 12.33 15.00 17.66 19.66 21.66 23.00 24.33 25.66 27.00 28.33 29.00

Depth, ft 6,692 13,560 21,600 29,592 36,000 42,384 47,184 51,984 55,200 58,392 61,584 64,800 67,992 69,600

W1, lb 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750 3750

W2, lb 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099 2099

W3, lb 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875 875

W4, lb ,999 2,108 3,643 5,582 7,434 9,543 11,302 13,210 14,571 15,988 17,471 19,032 20,647 21,502

Pa, lb/ft2

Calculations for Tension in Geogrid Reinforcement of MSE Retaining Wall

No.

TABLE 8.7

568 826 1084 1342 1549 1755 1910 2065 2168 2271 2374 2478 2581 2635

Pq, lb/ft2 492 895 1326 1782 2175 2598 2940 3309 3573 3851 4146 4463 4801 4989

v, lb/ft2 3.99 3.34 3.34 3.00 2.67 2.33 2.00 1.67 1.34 1.33 1.34 1.34 1.34

vi, ft2

509 774 1148 1387 1504 1570 1525 1433 1237 1328 1436 1545 1662

T, lb/ft

1500 1500 1500 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600

Grid, UX-

733

RETAINING WALLS

Step 4: Calculate Internal Stability. The calculation of Ka for this check is similar to the external calculation, except that the slope angle above the wall (if any) is always assumed to be zero. Thus, Ka 0.31 in this example. The additional forces contributed by the sloping surface are accounted for in the summation of forces and moments in determining bearing stress. Calculation of internal stability and tension in reinforcements is similar to the preceding calculations. At each level of reinforcement, the vertical stress i is calculated on the basis of the resultant of the forces and moments of both the reinforced fill and the external forces. This stress is then multiplied by Ka and the vertical tributary area vi to calculate the tension in the reinforcement. If the calculated tension T exceeds the allowable tension Tal, either a stronger reinforcement or a reduced vertical spacing must be adopted. The allowable design stress for the geogrids is determined from AASHTO criteria, considering both ultimate strength and serviceability. Both the geogrid and the connection of the grid to the face must be considered. In this case the following allowable tension values have been determined for two geogrids: Geogrid UX1500: Tal 1267 lb/ft Geogrid UX1600: Tal 1731 lb/ft The calculations for tension in Table 8.7 can now be made; the last column indicates the reinforcement selected. Check pullout in the top geogrid layer. Geogrids must extend beyond the failure plane (45° /2) by at least 3 ft. Le 20 [26.67 tan (45° 34⁄2 ) 26.67 tan (3.6°)] 7.50 ft 3.0

OK

Calculate pullout resistance by friction (two grid sides) based on weight acting beyond the failure plane: Minimum pullout capacity 2[7.5 ft 2.33 ft 120 lb/ft3 W3]Ci tan 2(2097 2099)1.00 tan 34° 5660 lb/ft FS 5660/508 11.1 2.0

OK

8.5.12 K0-Stiffness Method—A Unified Method for Both Metallic and Polymeric Reinforced Soil Walls Allen and Bathurst (2001) developed a new methodology for estimating reinforcement loads in both steel and geosynthetic reinforced soil walls known as the K0-Stiffness Method. Figure 8.44a and b, for polymeric and metal reinforcements, respectively, are provided for estimating the reinforcement load distribution with respect to the magnitude of maximum reinforcement tension from the top to the bottom of the wall. The soil reinforcement load distribution factor (Dtmax) in these two figures was determined empirically from all of the available field wall case histories. There were empirical databases consisting of measured reinforcement strains and loads from nine full-scale field geosynthetic wall cases (13 different wall sections and surcharge conditions, and 58 individual data points) and 19 full-scale field steel reinforced soil wall cases

734

CHAPTER EIGHT

FIGURE 8.44 Distribution of maximum tension force in a reinforcement layer Tmax with normalized depth below top of wall. (a) For geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls; (b) for steel-reinforced soil walls. (From Research Report WA-RD 528.1, Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, Wash., with permission)

(24 different wall sections and surcharge conditions, and 102 individual data points). The resulting factor is shown in Fig. 8.44a for geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls and in Fig. 8.44b for steel-reinforced soil walls. This factor, D tmax, is the ratio of the maximum tension force Tmax in a reinforcement layer to the maximum reinforcement loads in the wall, Tmxmx (the maximum value of Tmax within the wall). The two parts of Fig. 8.44 provide the distributions of load, but the magnitude of Tmax is evaluated by the equations of the K0-Stiffness Method in Art. 8.5.13. Empirical reinforcement load distributions provided in Fig. 8.44a and b apply only to walls constructed on a firm soil foundation. The distributions that would result for a rock or soft-soil foundation may differ from those shown. The two parts of the figure demonstrate the differences in reinforcement load distributions between geosynthetic- and steel-reinforced soil walls. The long recognized fact of nontriangular load distribution is clarified, especially for the geosynthetic-reinforced soil wall. Though two different drawings have been used to determine the reinforcement load distribution, this new method provides an improved load estimation for both steel- and geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls and a unified approach. This new method was developed empirically through analyses of many full-scale wall case histories. In most cases, reinforcement loads had to be estimated from measured reinforcement strain converted to load through a properly estimated reinforcement modulus. For metal-reinforced soil walls, the use of Young’s modulus to convert strain to stress and load is relatively straightforward. However, to accurately determine the

735

RETAINING WALLS

reinforcement loads for geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls, the correct modulus, considering time and temperature effects, had to be estimated accurately. The creep modulus generated from long-term laboratory creep data through regular product analysis was considered accurate enough for estimating reinforcement loads from measured strains. Once the correct load levels in the reinforcement layers were established, the reinforcement loads obtained from the full-scale walls were compared to what would be predicted with the new method and the current methodologies found in design guidelines and design codes, including the simplified coherent gravity approach in article 5.8.4.1 of AASHTO. All existing design methodologies were found to provide inaccurate load predictions, especially for geosynthetic-reinforced walls. Considering all available case histories, Allen and Bathurst (2001) reported that the average and coefficient of variation (COV) of the ratio of the predicted to measured Tmax, the peak reinforcement load in each layer, for the simplified method were as follows: 2.9 and 85.9 percent, respectively, for geosynthetic walls, and 0.9 and 50.6 percent, respectively, for steel-reinforced soil walls. The average and COV of the ratio for the K0-Stiffness Method were as follows: 1.12 and 40.8 percent, respectively, for geosynthetic walls, and 1.12 and 35.1 percent, respectively, for steel-reinforced soil walls. This indicates a marked improvement and shows that the calculated loads can be estimated more closely with the Dt max factors and the K0-Stiffness Method. In the determination of the magnitude of Tmax in the wall, the stiffness of all wall components (facing type, facing batter, reinforcement stiffness, and spacing) relative to soil stiffness is evaluated. By the nature of extensibility of soil reinforcement, the reinforcement load distributions (Dtmax) are differentiated by two unique figures. From working load to ultimate load up to incipient soil failure, this methodology covers the full range of strain and load predictions. The method is workable to estimate reinforcement responses for both the serviceability and strength limit state. It also includes the estimate of wall deformation from reinforcement strain prediction, load, and resistance factors that account for the uncertainty in the method and material properties.

8.5.13 Estimating Maximum Reinforcement Load Using the K0-Stiffness Method According to the K0-Stiffness Method, with reference to Dt from Fig. 8.44a and b, the peak load, Tmax (lb/ft), in each reinforcement layer can be calculated with the procedure summarized below (Allen and Bathurst, 2001): max

冢

Sglobal Tmax 0.5 SvK0 (H S) Dt local fbfs 0.27 Pa max

where

冣

0.24

(8.16)

Sv tributary height (ft) (assumed equivalent to the average vertical spacing of the reinforcement at each layer location when analyses are carried out per unit length of wall) K0 at-rest lateral earth pressure coefficient for the reinforced backfill unit weight of fill material (lb/ft3) H vertical wall height at the wall face (ft) S average soil surcharge height above wall top (ft) Dt distribution factor to estimate Tmax for each layer as a function of its depth below the wall top relative to Tmxmx (the maximum value of Tmax within the wall) Sglobal global reinforcement stiffness (lb/ft2) local local stiffness factor max

736

CHAPTER EIGHT

fb facing batter factor fs facing stiffness factor Pa atmospheric pressure (a constant to preserve dimensional consistency equal to 2110 lb/ft2 for the indicated units) Sglobal, local, fb, fs, and Dt are further defined below. K0 can be determined from the coefficient of lateral at-rest earth pressure for normally consolidated soil: max

K0 1 sin

(8.17)

where (degrees) is the peak angle of internal soil friction for the wall backfill. For steel reinforced systems, K0 for design should be 0.3 or greater. This equation for K0 has been shown to work reasonably well for normally consolidated sands, and can be modified by using the overconsolidation ratio (OCR) for sand that has been preloaded or compacted. However, because the OCR is very difficult to estimate for compacted sands, especially at the time of wall design, the K0-Stiffness Method was calibrated using only Eq. (8.17) to determine K0. Because the K0-Stiffness Method is empirically based, it can be argued that the method implicitly includes compaction effects, and therefore modification of Eq. (8.17) to account for compaction is not necessary. Note also that the method was calibrated using measured peak shear strength data corrected to peak plane strain shear strength values. Global stiffness Sglobal considers the stiffness of the entire wall section, and is calculated as follows: sum of J Jave Sglobal i H H/n

(8.18)

where Jave (lb/ft) is the average modulus of all reinforcement layers within the entire wall section, Ji (lb/ft) is the modulus of an individual reinforcement layer, H is the total wall height, and n is the number of reinforcement layers within the entire wall section. Local stiffness Slocal (lb/ft2) considers the stiffness and reinforcement density at a given layer, and is calculated as follows: J Slocal Sv

(8.19)

where J is the modulus of an individual reinforcement layer, and Sv is the vertical spacing of the reinforcement layers near a specific layer. The local stiffness factor local is defined as

冢

Slocal local Sglobal

冣

a

(8.20)

where a is a coefficient that is also a function of stiffness. Observations from available data suggest that setting a 1.0 for geosynthetic-reinforced walls and a 0.0 for steel-reinforced soil walls is sufficiently accurate. The wall face batter factor fb which accounts for the influence of the reduced soil weight on reinforcement loads, is determined as follows:

冢冣

Kabh fb Kavh

d

(8.21)

737

RETAINING WALLS

where K abh is the horizontal component of the active earth pressure coefficient accounting for wall face batter, Kavh is the horizontal component of the active earth pressure coefficient, and d is a constant coefficient (recommended to be 0.5 to provide the best fit to the empirical data). The wall is assumed to be vertical. The facing stiffness factor fs was empirically derived to account for the significantly reduced reinforcement stresses observed for geosynthetic walls with segmental concrete block and propped panel wall facings. It is not yet known whether this facing stiffness correction is fully applicable to steel-reinforced wall systems. On the basis of data available, Allen and Bathurst (2001) recommend that this value be set equal to the following: 0.5 for segmental concrete block and propped panel faced walls 1.0 for all other types of wall facings (e.g., wrapped face, welded wire or gabion faced, and incremental precast concrete facings) 1.0 for all steel-reinforced soil walls Note that the facings defined above as flexible still have some stiffness and some ability to take a portion of the load applied to the wall system internally. It is possible to have facings that are more flexible than the types listed above, and consequently walls with very flexible facings may require a facing stiffness factor greater than 1.0. The maximum wall heights available where the facing stiffness effect could be observed were approximately 20 ft (6 m). Data from taller walls were not available. It is possible that this facing stiffness effect may not be as strong for much taller walls. Therefore, caution should be exercised when using those preliminary fs values for walls taller than 20 ft (6 m). Detailed background information as well as several numerical examples for both steel and geosynthetic reinforced soil walls are provided by Allen and Bathurst (2001). The following is a numerical example of applying the preceding equations for the evaluation of Tmax at reinforcing layers 4 ft (1.2 m), 10 ft (3 m), and 18 ft (5.5 m) from the top of the wall. ●

Design assumptions A 20-ft-high (6-m) segmental concrete block MSE wall has a vertical facing and 10 layers (2-ft or 0.6 m uniform spacing) of the same grade polyester (PET) geogrid reinforcements. Thus, H 20 ft (6 m), fs 0.5, n 10, Sv 2 ft (0.6 m), and Jave 28,780 lb/ft (420 kN/m) for PET. Since the wall is vertical, Kabh/Kavh 1.0. The wall has a 2-ft earth surcharge, soil with 125 lb/ft3 unit weight, and 34° peak soil friction angle. Thus, S 2 ft, 125 lb/ft3, 34°, and Pa 101 kPa 101 kN/m2 2110 lb/ft2.

●

Computations From Eq. (8.17), K0 1 sin 34° 0.441. From Eq. (8.18), Sglobal (28,780)/(20/10) 14,390 lb/ft2. From Eq. (8.19), Slocal 28,780/2 14,390 lb/ft2. From Eq. (8.20), local (14,390/14,390)1 1.0. From Eq. (8.21), fb (1.0)0.5 1.0. From Eq. 8.16, for the K 0-Stiffness Method, T max 0.5 (S v)(0.441)(125)(20 2)(Dt )(1.0) (1.0)(0.5)(0.27)(14,390/2110)0.24 (129.8)(Sv)(Dt ). Next, evaluate Tmax at distances Z from the top of the wall, obtaining the distribution factor Dt from Fig. 8.44 for each Z/H ratio: At 4 ft, Z/H 0.2, Dt 0.733, Tmax 95.1 (Sv) lb/ft2 190.2 lb/ft; at 10 ft, Z/H 0.5, Dt 1.00, Tmax 129.8 (Sv) lb/ft2 259.6 lb/ft; and at 18 ft, Z/H 0.9, Dt 0.60, Tmax 83.8 (Sv) lb/ft2 167.6 lb/ft. max

max

max

max

max

max

738

CHAPTER EIGHT

If the results for this example are compared with those obtained by the AASHTO method (Art. 8.5.11), it will be seen that the total required reinforcement forces for the K0-Stiffness Method are only about one-quarter of those for the AASHTO method. With the assumption that all the 10 reinforcement layers have the same stiffness, the calculation of reinforcement forces demonstrated above is a first trial. The global stiffness factor (Sglobal) should be revised according to the actual reinforcing stiffness distribution. To avoid the iterative nature of the K0-Stiffness Method, Allen and Bathurst (2001) also provide a simplified methodology with different combined global stiffness curves according to the type of reinforcing material as well as the height of wall.

8.6 NONGRAVITY CANTILEVERED WALL DESIGN Nongravity cantilevered walls are those that provide lateral resistance through vertical elements embedded in soil, with the retained soil between the vertical elements usually supported by facing elements. Such walls may be constructed of concrete, steel, or timber. Their height is usually limited to about 15 ft (4.6 m), unless provided with additional support anchors. 8.6.1 Earth Pressure and Surcharge Loads Lateral earth pressure can be estimated assuming wedge theory using a planar surface of sliding as defined by Coulomb’s theory. For permanent walls, effective stress methods of analysis and drained shear strength parameters for soils can be used for determining lateral earth pressures. Alternatively, the simplified earth pressure distributions shown in Figs. 8.45 and 8.46 can be used. Nomenclature and notes for Fig. 8.45 are given in Table 8.8.

FIGURE 8.45 Simplified earth pressure distributions for permanent flexible cantilevered walls with discrete vertical wall elements. (a) Embedment in soil; (b) embedment in rock. Note: Refer to Table 8.8 for general notes and legend. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

RETAINING WALLS

β Ka1γ′1

Soil 1 (γ ′1)

H 1

β′

x P*

(Kp2 – Ka2)γ ′2 1

Soil 2 (γ ′2) α

F

D0

D ≅ 1.2 D0

Dredge line

739

1. Determine the active earth pressure on the wall due to surchage loads, the retained soil, and differential water pressure above the dredge line. 2. Determine the magnitude of active pressure at the dredge line (P*) due to surcharge loads, retained soil, and differential water pressure, using the earth pressure coefficient Ka2. 3. Determine the value of x = P*/[(Kp2 – Ka2)γ ′2 ] for the distribution of net passive pressure in front of the wall below the dredge line. 4. Sum moments about the point of action of F to determine the embedment (D0) for which the net passive pressure is sufficient to provide equilibrium. 5. Determine the depth (point α) at which the shear in the wall is zero (i.e., the point at which the areas of the driving and resisting pressure diagrams are equivalent). 6. Calculate the maximum bending moment at the point of zero shear. 7. Calculate the design depth, D = 1.2 D0 to 1.4 D0, for a safety factor of 1.5 to 2.0.

(a) Pressure distribution

(b) Simplified design procedure

Notes: (1) Surcharge and water pressures must be added to the above earth pressures. (2) Forces shown are per horizontal foot of vertical wall element.

FIGURE 8.46 Simplified earth pressure distributions and design procedures for permanent flexible cantilevered walls with continuous vertical wall elements. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

For temporary applications in cohesive soils, total stress methods of analysis and undrained shear strength parameters apply. The simplified earth pressure distributions shown in Figs. 8.46 and 8.47 can alternatively be used with the following limitations: 1. The ratio of overburden pressure to undrained shear strength must be less than 3. This ratio is referred to as the stability number N H/c. 2. The active earth pressure must not be less than 0.25 times the effective overburden pressure at any depth. Nomenclature and notes for Fig. 8.47 are given in Table 8.8. Where discrete vertical wall elements are used for support, the width of each vertical element should be assumed to equal the width of the flange or diameter of the element for driven sections, and to equal the diameter of the concrete-filled hole for sections encased in concrete. For permanent walls, Figs. 8.45 and 8.46 show the magnitude and location of resultant loads and resisting forces for discrete vertical elements embedded in soil and rock. The procedure for determining the resultant passive resistance of a vertical element assumes that net passive resistance is mobilized across a maximum of 3 times the element width or diameter (reduced, if necessary, to account for soft clay or discontinuities in the embedded depth of soil or rock). Also, a depth of 1.5 times the width of an element in soil, and 1 ft (300 mm) for an element in rock, is ineffective in providing passive lateral support.

740

CHAPTER EIGHT

TABLE 8.8 General Notes and Legend for Simplified Earth Pressure Distributions for Permanent and Temporary Flexible Cantilevered Walls with Discrete Vertical Wall Elements, Figs. 8.45 and 8.47 Legend: effective unit weight of soil b vertical element width l spacing between vertical wall elements, center to center Su undrained shear strength of cohesive soil s shear strength of rock mass Pp passive resistance per vertical wall element Pa active earth pressure per vertical wall element ground surface slope behind wall for slope up from wall ground surface slope in front of wall for slope down from wall Ka active earth pressure coefficient; refer to Art. 8.2.3 Kp passive earth pressure coefficient; refer to Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, AASHTO, 2002. effective angle of soil friction

冧

Notes: 1. For temporary walls embedded in granular soil or rock, refer to Fig. 8.45 to determine passive resistance and use diagrams on Fig. 8.47 to determine active earth pressure of retained soil. 2. Surcharge and water pressures must be added to the indicated earth pressures. 3. Forces shown are per vertical wall element. 4. Pressure distributions below the exposed portion of the wall are based on an effective element width of 3b, which is valid for l 5b. For l 5b, refer to Figs. 8.46 and 8.48 for continuous wall elements to determine pressure distributions on embedded portions of the wall. Source: From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission.

FIGURE 8.47 Simplified earth pressure distributions for temporary flexible cantilevered walls with discrete vertical wall elements. (a) Embedment in cohesive soil retaining granular soil; (b) embedment in cohesive soil retaining cohesive soil. Note: Refer to Table 8.8 for general notes and legend. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

741

RETAINING WALLS 2 Su1 β Granular Kasγ ′s soil (γ ′s) 1

D0 4 Su – γ ′sH

H H–

D ≅ 1.2 D0

Cohesive soil

Cohesive soil 1 (γ 1′ , Su1)

F

(a) Embedment in cohesive soil retaining granular soil

2 Su 1 γ′1

γ ′1H – 2Su1

D0 4 Su – γ ′1H

D ≅ 1.2 D0

H

β

Cohesive soil 2 (γ ′2, Su2)

F

(b) Embedment in cohesive soil retaining cohesive soil

Notes: (1) For walls embedded in granular soil, refer to Fig. 8.46 and use above diagram for retained cohesive soil when appropriate. (2) Surface and water pressures must be added to the above earth pressures. (3) Forces shown are per horizontal foot of vertical wall element. FIGURE 8.48 Simplified earth pressure distributions for temporary flexible cantilevered walls with continuous vertical wall elements. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

The design lateral pressure must include lateral pressure due to traffic, permanent point and line surcharge loads, backfill compaction, or other types of surcharge loads, as well as the lateral earth pressure.

8.6.2 Water Pressure and Drainage Flexible cantilevered walls must be designed to resist the maximum anticipated water pressure. For a horizontal static groundwater table, the total hydrostatic water pressure can be determined from the hydrostatic head by the traditional method. For differing groundwater levels on opposite sides of the wall, the water pressure and seepage forces can be determined by net flow procedures or other methods. Seepage can be controlled by installation of a drainage medium. Preformed drainage panels, sand or gravel drains, or wick drains can be placed behind the facing with outlets at the base of the wall. It is important that drainage panels maintain their function under design earth pressures and surcharge loadings. AASHTO requires that they extend from the base of the wall to a level 1 ft (300 mm) below the top of the wall. Where thin drainage panels are used behind walls, saturated or moist soil behind the panels may be subject to freezing and expansion. In such cases, insulation can be provided on the walls to prevent soil freezing or the wall can be designed for the pressures that may be exerted on it by frozen soil.

742

CHAPTER EIGHT

8.6.3 Structure Dimensions and External Stability Flexible cantilevered walls should be dimensioned to ensure stability against passive failure of embedded vertical elements using a factor of safety of 1.5 based on unfactored loads. Vertical elements must be designed to support the full design earth, surcharge, and water pressures between the elements. In determining the depth of embedment to mobilize passive resistance, consideration should be given to planes of weakness (such as “slickensides,” bedding planes, and joint sets) that could reduce the strength of the soil or rock from that determined by field or laboratory tests. AASHTO recommends that for embedment in intact rock, including massive to appreciably jointed rock, which should not be allowed to fail through a joint surface, design should be based on an allowable shear strength of 0.10 to 0.15 times the uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock.

8.6.4 Structure Design Structural design of individual wall elements may be performed by service load or load factor design methods. The maximum spacing L between vertical supporting elements depends on the relative stiffness of the vertical elements and facing, the design pressure Pa, and the type and condition of soil to be supported. Design the facing for the bending moment Mmax at any level, as determined by the following equations: Simple span (no soil arching): PaL2 Mmax 8

(8.22)

PaL2 Mmax 12

(8.23)

PaL2 Mmax 10

(8.24)

Simple span (soil arching):

Continuous:

Equation (8.22) is applicable for simply supported facings where the soil will not arch between vertical supports (e.g., in soft cohesive soils or for rigid concrete facing placed tightly against the in-place soil). Equation (8.23) is applicable for simply supported facings where the soil will arch between vertical supports (e.g., in granular or stiff cohesive soils with flexible facing, or rigid facing behind which there is sufficient space to permit the in-place soil to arch). Equation (8.24) is applicable for facings that are continuous over several vertical supports (e.g., reinforced shotcrete).

8.6.5 Overall Stability The overall stability of slopes in the vicinity of walls is considered part of the design of retaining walls. The overall stability of the retaining wall, retained slope, and foundation soil or rock can be evaluated for all walls using limiting equilibrium methods of analysis. AASHTO gives the following requirements:

743

RETAINING WALLS

A minimum factor of safety of 1.3 shall be used for walls designed for static loads, except the factor of safety shall be 1.5 for walls that support abutments, buildings, critical utilities, or other installations with a low tolerance for failure. A minimum factor of safety of 1.1 shall be used when designing walls for seismic loads. In all cases, the subsurface conditions and soil/rock properties of the wall site shall be adequately characterized through insitu exploration and testing and/or laboratory testing…

8.6.6 Corrosion Protection Prestressed anchors and anchor heads must be protected against corrosion that would result from ground and groundwater conditions at the site. The level of corrosion protection depends on both the ground environment and the potential consequences of an anchor failure. Also, anchors for permanent walls require a higher level of corrosion protection than those for temporary walls.

8.7 ANCHORED WALL DESIGN Anchored walls are made up of the same elements as cantilevered walls but are furnished with one or more tiers of anchors for additional lateral support. Anchors may be either prestressed or dead-man type. Tendons or bars extend from the wall face to a region beyond the active zone where they are grouted in place or mechanically anchored. Such walls are typically constructed from the top down in cut situations rather than fill conditions. Figure 8.49 illustrates an anchored wall and defines terminology.

Bearing plate

Design height (H)

Anchor head

Sheathing Anchor Grout

Wall bearing element

Wall (vertical elements with facing)

Un b (15 onde ′m dl inim eng um th )

15′ minimum (4.6 m)

Active stress failure plane (or other critical failure surface)

10° minimum

Finished grade 45° +

Vertical element embedment

φ′ 2

Primary grout Bonded length

FIGURE 8.49 Terms used in flexible anchored wall design. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

744

CHAPTER EIGHT

8.7.1 Earth Pressure and Surcharge Loadings The choice of lateral earth pressures used for design should take into account the method and sequence of construction, rigidity of the wall-anchor system, physical characteristics and stability of the ground mass to be supported, allowable wall deflections, space between anchors, anchor prestress, and potential for anchor yield. For stable ground masses, the final lateral earth pressures on a completed wall with two or more levels of anchors constructed from the top down can be calculated using the apparent earth pressure distributions shown in Fig. 8.50. For unstable or marginally stable ground masses, design earth pressures will be greater than those shown in Fig. 8.50. Therefore, loads

SOIL TYPE

APPARENT EARTH PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION

H = final wall height Ka = active earth pressure coefficient γ′ = effective soil unit weight γ = total soil unit weight m = reduction factor q u = unconfined compressive strength

H

Sand (4) (or permanent walls in clay) 0.65 Kaγ′H

NOTATION

(1)

NOTES (1) Ka = tan2 (45 – 0.25 H (4)

Soft to medium clay (qu = 0.25 to 1.0 tsf) ( = 24 to 96 kPa)

0.75 H

KaγH

(2)

0.25 H Stiff to (4) hard clay (qu > 1.0 tsf) (> 24kPa)

0.50 H 0.25 H 0.4γH

φ′ 2)

(2) Ka = 1 – m (2qu/γH) but not less than 0.25 m = 1 for overconsolidated clays m = 0.4 for normally consolidated clay (3) Value of 0.4 should be used for long-term excavations; values between 0.4 and 0.2 may be used for short-term conditions. (4) Surcharge and water pressures must be added to these earth pressure diagrams. The two lower diagrams are not valid for permanent walls or walls where water level lies above bottom of excavation.

(3)

FIGURE 8.50 Guidelines for estimating earth pressures on walls with two or more levels of anchors constructed from the top down. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

RETAINING WALLS

745

should be estimated using methods of slope stability analysis that include the effects of anchors, or that consider “interslice” forces. In developing design earth pressures, consideration should be given to wall displacements that may affect adjacent structures or underground utilities. Rough estimates of settlement adjacent to braced or anchored flexible walls can be made using Fig. 8.51. If wall deflections estimated using Fig. 8.51 are excessive, a more detailed analysis can be made using beam-on-elastic-foundation, finite element, or other methods of analysis that consider soil-structure interaction effects. Where a structure or utility particularly sensitive to settlement is located close to a wall, wall deflections should be calculated on the basis of the loading, soil properties, anchor spacing, and wall element stiffness. The distribution of earth pressure loading for anchored walls with one level of anchors can be assumed to be triangular and to be based on a lateral earth pressure coefficient (i.e., Ka, K0, or Kp) consistent with the expected wall deflection. To consider the case where excavation has advanced down to the first anchor level but the anchors have not yet been installed, the wall can be treated as a nongravity cantilevered wall and the earth pressure distribution assumed triangular. Overstressing of anchors

FIGURE 8.51 Settlement profiles behind braced or anchored walls. (From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission)

746

CHAPTER EIGHT

should be avoided, because excessive anchor loads, relative to the capacity of the retained ground mass, can cause undesirable deflections, or passive failure of the wall into the retained soil. As with other walls, design lateral pressures for walls constructed from the top down must include the lateral pressure due to traffic or other surcharge loading. Where there is no anchor level or only one, the magnitude and distribution of lateral resisting forces for embedded vertical elements in soil or rock can be determined as described in Art. 8.6.1. When two or more levels of anchors have been installed, the lateral resistance provided by embedded vertical elements will depend on the element stiffness and deflection under load. Earth pressures on anchored walls constructed from the bottom up (fill construction) are affected by the construction method and sequence. These must be well specified, and the basis for lateral earth pressures fully documented. For walls with a single anchor level, consider a triangular distribution, defined by Ka per unit length of wall height, plus surcharge loads. For walls with multiple anchor levels, consider a rectangular pressure distribution, derived by increasing the total force from the triangular pressure distribution just described by one-third and applying the force as a uniform pressure distribution. Drainage considerations for anchored walls are similar to those discussed in Art. 8.6.2. 8.7.2 Structure Dimensions and External Stability The design of anchored walls involves a determination of several factors. Included are the size, spacing, and depth of embedment of vertical wall elements and facing; the type, capacity, spacing, depth, inclination, and corrosion protection of anchors; and the structural capacity and stability of the wall, wall foundation, and surrounding soil mass for all intermediate and final stages of construction. The bearing capacity and settlement of vertical wall elements under the action of the vertical component of the anchor forces and other vertical loads must also be evaluated. AASHTO provides the following guidance: For walls supported in or through soft clays with Su 0.3´H, continuous vertical elements extending well below the exposed base of the wall may be required to prevent heave in front of the wall. Otherwise, the vertical elements are embedded several feet as required for stability or end bearing. (Where significant embedment of the wall is required to prevent bottom heave, the lowest section of wall below the lowest row of anchors must be designed to resist the moment induced by the pressure acting between the lowest row of anchors and the base of the exposed wall, and the force Pb 0.7(HBe 1.4cH cBe) acting at the mid-height of the embedded depth of the wall.)

In the above, the following definitions apply: Be width of excavation perpendicular to wall c cohesion of soil H design wall height Su undrained shear strength of cohesive soil soil unit weight ´ effective unit weight of soil 8.7.3 General Design Procedures for Anchored Walls For a typical wall with two or more rows of anchors constructed from the top down, the general procedure is to (1) design for the final condition with multiple rows of anchors and

747

RETAINING WALLS

(2) check the design for the various stages of construction. The required horizontal component of each anchor force can be calculated using apparent earth pressure distributions such as given in Fig. 8.50. Any other applicable forces such as horizontal water pressure, surcharge, or seismic forces must be included where applicable. The anchor inclination must be considered in calculating the anchor force. The horizontal anchor spacing and anchor capacity must provide the required total anchor force. Vertical wall elements must be designed to resist all applicable forces such as horizontal earth pressure, surcharge, water pressure, and anchor and seismic loadings, as well as the vertical component of earth pressure due to wall friction and the vertical component of anchor loads and any other vertical loads. In the analysis, supports may be assumed at each anchor location and at the bottom if the vertical element extends below the bottom of the wall. All components should be checked for the various earth pressure distributions and other loading conditions that may exist during construction. 8.7.4 Anchor Design Anchor design includes the selection of a feasible anchor system, estimation of anchor capacity, determination of unbonded length, and consideration of corrosion protection. In determining the feasibility of employing anchors at a particular location, considerations include the availability of underground easements, proximity of buried facilities to anchor locations, and the suitability of subsurface soil and rock conditions within the anchor stressing zone. Ultimate anchor capacity per unit length may be estimated from Tables 8.9 and 8.10 for soil and rock, respectively. The values are based on straight-shaft anchors TABLE 8.9 Ultimate Values of Load Transfer for Preliminary Design of Anchors in Soil

Soil type Sand and gravel

Sand

Sand and silt

Silt-clay mixture with minimum LL, PI, and LI restrictions, or fine micaceous† sand or silt mixtures

Relative density or consistency*

Estimated ultimate transfer load, kips per lineal foot (N/mm)

Loose Medium dense Dense Loose Medium dense Dense Loose Medium dense Dense Stiff Hard

10 (1.46) 15 (2.19) 20 (2.92) 7 (1.02) 10 (1.46) 13 (1.90) 5 (0.73) 7 (1.02) 9 (1.31) 2 (0.29) 4 (0.58)

*Values corrected for overburden pressure. †The presence of mica tends to increase the volume and compressibility of sand and soft deposits due to bridging action and subsequent flexibility under increased pressures. Source: From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission.

748

CHAPTER EIGHT TABLE 8.10 Ultimate Values of Load Transfer for Preliminary Design of Anchors in Rock

Rock type

Estimated ultimate transfer load, kips per lineal foot (N/mm)

Granite or basalt Dolomitic limestone Soft limestone Sandstone Slates and hard shales Soft shales

50 (7.30) 40 (5.84) 30 (4.38) 30 (4.38) 25 (3.65) 10 (1.46)

Source: From Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., with permission.

installed in small-diameter holes using a low grout pressure. Other anchor types and installation procedures may result in different anchor capacities. Allowable anchor capacity for small-diameter anchors may be estimated by multiplying the ultimate anchor capacity per unit length by the bonded (or stressing) length and dividing by a factor of safety. AASHTO suggests 2.5 for anchors in soil and 3.0 for anchors in rock. Bearing elements for anchors must be designed so that shear stresses in the vertical wall elements and facing are within allowable limits. The capacity of each anchor should be verified as part of a stressing and testing program. Determination of the unbonded anchor length should consider the location of the critical failure surface farthest from the wall, the minimum length required to ensure minimal loss of anchor prestress due to long-term ground movements, and the depth to adequate anchoring strata. As shown in Fig. 8.49, the unbonded (or free) anchor length should not be less than 15 ft (4.6 m) and should extend 5 ft (1.5 m) or one-fifth of the design wall height, whichever is greater, beyond the critical failure surface in the soil mass being retained by the wall. For granular soils or drained cohesive soils, the critical failure surface is typically assumed to be the active failure wedge. This wedge is defined by a plane extending upward from the base of the wall at an angle of 45° ′/2 from the horizontal, where ′ is the effective angle of soil friction. Longer free lengths may be required for anchors in plastic soils or where critical failure surfaces are defined by planes or discontinuities with other orientations. Selection of anchor inclination should consider the location of suitable soil or rock strata, the presence of buried utilities or other geometric constraints, and constructibility of the anchor drill holes. AASHTO suggests that anchors be located on a minimum inclination of 10° below horizontal and the bonded zone be located a minimum depth of 15 ft (4.6 m) below the ground surface. The component of vertical load resulting from anchor inclination must be included in evaluating the end bearing and settlement of vertical wall elements. AASHTO suggests that the minimum horizontal spacing of anchors be either 3 times the diameter of the bonded zone or 4 ft (1.2 m), whichever is larger. If small spacings are required, consideration can be given to different anchor inclinations between alternating anchors.

749

RETAINING WALLS

8.8 SOIL NAILED STRUCTURES 8.8.1 Development and General Considerations Figure 8.52 shows a cross-section of the first soil nailed wall, which was a temporary wall built in France (1972–1973) for a railroad project. Such walls are constructed from the top down during excavation. Reinforcing bars are either inserted in drilled holes and grouted into place, or driven into place. Then a facing of cast-in-place concrete or shotcrete is installed as the work progresses. The wall in France was built in Fontainebleau sand using a high density of short nails of two different lengths: 13 ft (4 m) for nails in the upper portion of the wall and 20 ft (6 m) for those in the lower portion. The first full-size experimental wall was constructed in Germany in 1979 using grouted nails and loaded to failure. In 1981, a prefabricatedconcrete-facing soil nailed wall was used in a commercial application in France. An extensive national research project conducted in France during the years 1986–1990 resulted in a noted publication titled Recommendations Clouterre. A soil nailed wall is constructed as an integral part of the construction of an excavation as illustrated in Fig. 8.53. (See Art. 8.8.7.) The soil is reinforced as the slope excavation progresses. Reinforcement generally consists of bars inserted parallel to one another and placed at a downward-sloping angle. The bars are inserted in a passive state; however, as the skin friction between the soil and the nails is mobilized, the nails are placed into tension. Figure 8.54 compares the action of soil nails and ground anchors. The work is carried out from the top downward in increments, gradually building up a reinforced soil mass. Some type of facing is generally necessary to keep the soil from caving between the soil nails. In the case of the Fontainebleau sand (effective friction angle of 38° and some cohesion), the distance for stability of the excavation

2 1

Reinforced concrete wall 4m

10 m

1.5 Fontainebleau sand

4 21°

Existing wall

Grouted nails 6m

New railway tracks

FIGURE 8.52 First soil nailed wall, constructed at Versailles, France, 1972–1973. (F. Schlosser, Behavior and Design of Soil Nailing, Proceedings of Symposium on Soil and Rock Improvement Techniques, Bangkok, 1982, with permission)

750

CHAPTER EIGHT

Excavate unsupported cut 3 to 6 ft high

STEP 1: Excavate small cut

STEP 2: Drill hole for nail

STEP 3: Install and grout nail

STEP 4: Place initial shotcrete layer and install bearing plates and nuts

1

2

3

4 STEP 5: Repeat process to final grade FIGURE 8.53

STEP 6: Place final facing

Typical construction sequence for soil nailed wall.

Dist. of T max along nail

Dist. of soil pressure To Wall Facing Anchors

FIGURE 8.54

Active zone

Nail Resistant zone

Resisting forces for (left) ground anchors and (right) soil nails.

RETAINING WALLS

751

between soil nails was about 6.6 ft (2 m) with failure occurring at about 9.8 ft (3 m). The sand between the nails will slough until an “arching” action occurs within the soil. The point where this action can no longer occur because the internal friction capacity of the soil has been exceeded defines the temporary facing limit. The concept of soil nailing has not been patented, nor is it patentable; however, numerous technologies have been patented. For soil nail walls to be cost-effective, the ground must be capable of standing unsupported while the nails and shotcrete are installed. The success of soil nail walls depends upon: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Selection of good applications in ground suitable for nailing Ability to quickly respond to changed ground conditions Use of a rational design procedure for the wall and each of its components Use of good construction specifications Ability of the owner and contractor to work together in a partnering concept Handling of work performance on-site by knowledgeable personnel representing each of the parties, including the owner

8.8.2 Suitable Soils Most research to date has been done in homogeneous soils. However, there is no reason why the concept cannot be applied to heterogeneous soil masses if proper consideration of soil properties is made and rationally applied to the selection of nail length and spacing. To be economical, soil nailed walls should be constructed in ground that can stand unsupported on a vertical or steeply sloped cut of 3 to 6 ft (1 to 2 m) for one to two days, and can maintain an open drill hole for a few hours. Soils considered favorable to soil nailing are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Naturally cohesive materials (silts and low-plasticity clays that are not prone to creep) Naturally cemented sands and gravels Weathered rock Fine to medium, homogeneous sand with capillary cohesion of 60 to 100 lb/ft2 (2.9 to 4.8 kPa) associated with a water content of at least 5 to 6 percent

According to FHWA Report RD-89-108, soil nailing is generally not considered costeffective or applicable in the following soils: 1. Loose granular soils with field standard penetration N values lower than about 10 or relative densities of less than 30 percent 2. Granular cohesionless soils of uniform size (poorly graded) with uniformity coefficient (D60 /D10) less than 2, unless found to be very dense; nailing of these soils may be impractical because of the necessity of stabilizing the cut face (by grouting or another permanent technique) prior to excavation 3. Soft cohesive soils with undrained shear strengths of less than 500 lb/ft2 (24 kPa), because of the inability to develop adequate pullout resistance 4. Highly plastic clays (LL 50 and PI 20 percent), because of their potential for excessive creep deformation 5. Expansive (swelling) and highly frost-susceptible soils

752

CHAPTER EIGHT

Soil nailing is also not recommended for the following conditions: 1. In ground with water pressure present at the face 2. Below the groundwater table, unless the slope can be effectively dewatered prior to excavation 3. Loose fill, granular soil with no apparent cohesion

8.8.3 Comparison with MSE Walls Soil nailed walls have some similarities with MSE walls but also some fundamental differences. The main similarities are: 1. The major mechanism in both MSE and soil nailed retaining structures is the development of tensile forces in the reinforcements due to frictional interaction and, consequently, restrainment of lateral deformations of the structures. 2. The reinforced soil mass is separated into two zones based on the points of maximum tension in the reinforcement (Fig. 8.54): an “active” zone close to the facing, where the shear stresses exerted on the surface of the reinforcement are directed outward and have a tendency to pull out the reinforcements, and a “resistant” zone, where the shear stresses are directed inward and prevent the sliding of the reinforcements. 3. The reinforcement forces are sustained by a frictional bond between the soil and the reinforcing element; the reinforced zone is stable and resists the thrust from the unreinforced soil it supports, much like a gravity retaining structure. 4. The facing of the retained structure is relatively thin, with prefabricated elements used for MSE walls and, usually, shotcrete for soil nailed walls. The main differences are: 1. The construction procedure. Although at the end of construction the two structures may look similar, the construction sequence is radically different. Soil nailed walls are constructed “top down” by staged excavations, while MSE walls are constructed “bottom up.” Thus, the wall deformation pattern is different during construction. This also results in differences in the distribution of the forces that develop in the reinforcement, particularly during the construction period. In an MSE structure (built bottom up), the working forces that develop in the reinforcement layers generally increase from top to bottom. In a nailed structure (built top down), the working loads that develop in the reinforcement layers are generally of uniform magnitude, similar to those in a braced excavation. 2. Nature of the soil. Soil nailing is an in situ reinforcement technique exploiting natural ground, the properties of which cannot be preselected and controlled as they are for MSE fills. MSE walls usually utilize clean, low-water-content granular backfills, which have a known friction angle and little to no cohesion. On the contrary, nails are installed into soil and rock (natural ground) whose strength properties (friction angle and cohesion) and water content can vary through a wide range. 3. Soil-reinforcement bond. Grouting techniques are usually employed to bond the nail reinforcement to the surrounding ground, with the load transferred along the grout to the soil interface. In MSE structures, friction is generated directly along the reinforcement-soil interface.

RETAINING WALLS

753

8.8.4 Wall Drainage Systems Almost all shotcrete failures in slope stabilization applications have resulted from inadequate drainage. Therefore, drainage is a critical design and construction element. Drainage from behind the shotcrete face can be provided by the following methods: 1. Surface interceptor ditch. Excavate a shallow ditch along the crest of the excavation to lead away surface water. Drainage gutters or lined ditches are recommended immediately behind the top of the wall. 2. Prefab geotextile drains. Place 12-in-wide (300-mm) prefabricated geotextile drain strips (Miradrain 6000, Amerdrain 200, etc.) vertically prior to applying the shotcrete. Typical spacings are the same as the horizontal nail spacing. Extend the drain mats down the full height of the excavation and discharge into a collector pipe at the base. 3. Weep holes and horizontal drains. Install 2-in-diameter (50-mm) PVC pipe weep holes on approximately 10-ft (3-m) centers through the shotcrete face where heavier seepage is encountered. Plug the pipe temporarily when shotcrete is applied. Longer PVC horizontal drain pipes can also be installed in heavy seepage areas. 8.8.5 Wall Facing Systems Temporary walls are typically left with a rough shotcrete face—“gun” finish—with weep holes and protruding nail heads. For permanent walls, where the rough finish is aesthetically unacceptable, the following face options are available: 1. Separate fascia wall. As an alternative to the exposed shotcrete finish, the shotcrete can be covered with a separate concrete fascia wall, either cast in place (CIP) or constructed of precast panels. The CIP section is typically a minimum of 6 to 8 in (150 to 200 mm) thick. Precast face panels can be smaller modular panels or fullheight fascia panels such as those used to cover permanent slurry walls. A disadvantage of the smaller modular face panels is difficulty of attaching the face panels to the nail heads and some proprietary patent restrictions. A disadvantage of full-height precast panels is that, because of practical constructibility weight and handling limitations, their use is limited to wall heights less than 25 ft (8 m). 2. Permanent exposed shotcrete facing. Present technology for shotcrete placement is such that the final shotcrete layer can be controlled to close tolerances, and with nominal hand finishing, an appearance similar to a CIP wall can be obtained (if desired). The shotcrete, whether left in the natural gun finish or hand-textured, can also be colored either by adding coloring agent to the mix or by applying a pigmented sealer or stain over the shotcrete surface. Only experienced, well-qualified structural shotcrete specialty contractors should place and finish the permanent structural shotcrete. “Wet-mix” shotcrete should be specified instead of dry-mix because good quality control is easier with wet-mix. Also, wet-mix shotcrete can be air-entrained for improved freeze-thaw durability, whereas dry-mix cannot. 8.8.6 Design of Soil Nailed Retaining Structures The stability of a soil nailed structure relies on (1) transfer of resisting tensile forces generated in the inclusions in the active zone into the ground in the resistant zone, through friction or adhesion mobilized at the soil-nail interface, and (2) passive resistance developed against the face of the nail. Ground nailing using closely spaced inclusions

754

CHAPTER EIGHT

produces a composite coherent material. As shown in Fig. 8.54, the tensile forces generated in the nails are considerably greater than those transmitted to the facing. The design procedure for a nailed retaining structure includes (1) estimation of nail forces and location of the potential sliding surface, (2) selection of the reinforcement type, cross-sectional area, length, inclination, and spacing, and (3) verification that stability is maintained during and after excavation with an adequate factor of safety. Methods for determining tensile, bending, and shear stresses in the nails are given by FHWA based on a limit equilibrium analysis. The majority of soil nailed retaining structures constructed in France are based on two distinct technologies: (1) the method of Hurpin, with nails driven into the ground on close spacing, i.e., vertical and horizontal spacing equal to or less than 3 ft (1 m), and (2) widely spaced grouted nails. With the method of Hurpin, the nails (generally reinforcing bars) are relatively short and are driven into the ground by percussion or vibratory methods. The relatively high nail density permits thinner wall facings. In walls with widely spaced nails, the nails are generally longer. Typical data for soil nailed walls with a vertical facing and a horizontal earth pressure are shown in Table 8.11. The “nailing density” listed in Table 8.11 is a dimensionless parameter representing soil nails placed in a uniform pattern. It is defined as Tr ShSvL

(8.25)

where Tr ultimate tensile force that can be mobilized at head of nail Sh horizontal spacing between nails Sv vertical spacing between nails L length of nails total unit weight of soil This parameter represents the maximum tensile force in a nail as it relates to the weight of the soil reinforced with a chosen grid spacing. A full set of preliminary design charts is included in the FHWA translation of Recommendations Clouterre, 1991. Diagrams for an angle of installation of the nails of i 20° are shown in Fig. 8.55 for illustration. Figure 8.55 provides a preliminary chart for a soil nailed wall. It seeks to define in approximate terms the lengths, spacings, and resistance values of the nails to ensure TABLE 8.11 Typical Characteristics of Soil Nailed Walls with Vertical Facing and Horizontal Earth Pressure Nails at close centers (method of Hurpin) Length of nails Number of nails per m2 of facing Perimeter of nail Tensile strength of reinforcing bar (nail) Nailing density

Widely spaced nails

0.5 to 0.7H 1 to 2

0.8 to 1.2H 0.15 to 0.4

150 to 200 mm (6 to 8 in) 120 to 200 kN (34 to 45 kips) 0.4 to 1.5

200 to 600 mm (8 to 24 in) 100 to 600 kN (22 to 135 kips) 0.13 to 0.6

Source: From Recommendations Clouterre, French National Research, 1991, (English translation by Federal Highway Administration, 1993), with permission.

755

RETAINING WALLS

N=

c γH

0.3 d=

L H

TL γShS vL

L d = 0.2 d = 0.3 d = 0.4 d = 0.5 d = 0.75 d=1

0.2

= 0.6

Soil γ ϕ c

H 20°

0.1

d=0 d = 0.1 F=

0

N=

c γH

0

1 tan ϕ

2

0.3 d=

L H

TL γShS vL

d = 0.4 d = 0.5 d = 0.75 d=1

0.2

Soil γ ϕ c

0.1 M (N, tan ϕ) A

0

= 0.8 L

d = 0.2 d = 0.3

0

OM OA

d = 0.1

1 tan ϕ

H 20°

d=0

F=

OM OA

2

FIGURE 8.55 Preliminary design charts for soil nailed walls. (From Recommendations Clouterre, French National Research, 1991, translation by Federal Highway Administration, 1993, with permission)

internal and external stability. It may be used in an early evaluation stage based on macro assumptions such as homogeneous soil, identical and evenly spaced loads in the nails, and pure tension in the nails; the bending stiffness of the nails is neglected, regardless of the angle of incidence of the potential failure surface. This approach is based on the classic method of vertical slices with circular potential failure surfaces. The charts are based on a system of coordinates that characterize the shear resistance of the soil.

756

CHAPTER EIGHT

Consider the following example: height H 10 m, 20 kN/m3, 35°, c 20 kPa. Assume L/H 0.8. Calculate coordinates and plot as point M on the chart. 20 c N 0.10 20 10 H

tan tan 35° 0.70

Draw a line from the origin O to M. The safety factor F is the ratio OM/OA. Therefore, for a safety factor of 3⁄2, locate point A two-thirds of the distance along the line OM. Interpolation gives the required nailing density d as 0.33. Thus: TL 0.33 ShSvL TL 0.33 20 0.8 10 52.8 kPa ShSvL Thus, for a nail tensile force TL, the spacings Sh and Sv can be determined. The result from the chart should be generally conservative and used only for preliminary evaluation. The final design for stability of a soil nailed wall is analyzed either by calculating the deformations or by using limit equilibrium design. The first method uses finite element calculation and has not been refined to the point where there is an “acceptable” procedure. In Europe to date, there has been considerable diversity in some details among the various design approaches, both within and across national boundaries. A most significant factor is the postulated mechanism by which nails are considered to reinforce a soil mass. For nails installed nearly parallel to the direction of maximum soil tensile strain (e.g., near-horizontal nails and a near-vertical excavation face), the prevailing opinion is that the reinforcing action is predominantly related to tensile loading within the nails. Under service load conditions, the contribution of shear or bending is considered negligible. As failure conditions are approached, the contribution of shear or bending action is more significant but still small. From a practical point of view, however, it is recognized that the soil nails should exhibit ductile behavior in response to bending in order to minimize the potential for sudden failures related to brittleness. Where reinforcing elements are used as dowels and are oriented nearly perpendicular to the direction of maximum shear strain, the shearing, bending, and tensile action of the reinforcement should be considered. All design methods are based on concepts of limiting equilibrium or ultimate limit states. Various types of potential slip surface are considered, including circular, log spiral, and bilinear wedge. In general, each of the methods appears to provide a satisfactory representation for design purposes. Consistent with the above, most design computer codes consider only the tensile action of the nails, but some also permit consideration of the shear or bending action of the nails. Almost all of the design methods do not explicitly consider the potential for pullout of the reinforcing nails within the active block between the facing and the slip surface. It is implicitly assumed that the nailsoil adhesion within this zone, together with the structural capacity of the facing, will be sufficient to prevent this type of failure. Some design approaches offer strict guidelines for the required structural wall capacity to prevent such active-zone failures, but others appear to rely on experience and do not directly address this issue. On the basis of the overall reinforcing requirements determined from the limiting equilibrium design calculations, the reinforcing steel is empirically proportioned. In general, designers use nails of uniform length and cross-sectional area, on a uniform spacing. For drilled and grouted nails, the nail spacing is typically in the 3- to 6-ft (1- to 2-m) range. For driven nails, much higher densities (typically 1.5 to 2 nails per

757

RETAINING WALLS

square meter) are used. The nail lengths are typically in the range of 60 to 80 percent of the height of the wall, but may be shorter in very competent rocklike materials and longer for heavy surface surcharge or high seismic or other operational loading. As noted above, facing design requirements are empirically determined using a variety of techniques. German practice requires the use of a uniform facing pressure equivalent to 75 to 85 percent of the active Coulomb loading. The Clouterre recommendations require designing the facing and connectors to support between 60 and 100 percent of the maximum nail loading (for both ultimate and serviceability limit states), depending on the nail spacing. 8.8.7 Construction Considerations for Soil Nailed Walls The construction sequence is typically to excavate, nail, and shotcrete the face in increments from the top down. Figure 8.56 shows a schematic of a sequence for underpass widening. Where face stability is a concern, a flashcoat of shotcrete may be applied before nail installation. The most common method of nail installation in

Bridge abutment

Bridge abutment

Existing slope paving Original existing ground

Temporary fill STEP 1: Excavate small cuts and place shotcrete flashcoat

Bridge abutment

STEP 3: Drill hole for nail

STEP 2: Place reinforcing steel and styrofoam blockouts for nails, and apply initial layer of structural shotcrete Bridge abutment

STEP 4: Install nail and pressure grout while extracting casing

FIGURE 8.56 Construction sequence for soil nailed wall used in widening of underpass. (From Oregon Department of Transportation, with permission)

758

CHAPTER EIGHT Bridge abutment

Bridge abutment

Front face of soil nailed wall (first shotcrete layer) Original existing ground

Temporary fill STEP 5: Install bearing plate and nut

STEP 6: Repeat process for all nail layers

Bridge abutment

Front face of soil nailed wall (second shotcrete layer) Final grade

STEP 7: Place second structural application to full height and architectural finish FIGURE 8.56

(Continued)

Europe, as in the United States, is the drill-and-grout method. Most commonly, the steel tendon is installed prior to grouting, although this sequence is sometimes reversed. In France, however, very significant use is also made of driven nails without grouting. Other specialty techniques for installing nails include jet grout nailing (France), driven nails with an oversize head and subsequent grouting of the annulus (Germany), and compressed-air explosive injection of nails (United Kingdom). Small hydraulic, track-mounted drill rigs of the rotary-percussive type are most commonly used to install nails. These rigs can work in relatively confined surroundings and are therefore compatible with many of the constraints associated with crowded urban

RETAINING WALLS

759

environments. Open-hole drilling methods are predominant, with cased-hole methods used in particularly difficult ground conditions. The most common grouting method used with open-hole drilling is the low-pressure tremie method. Where extensive use of casing is required, alternative methods of construction are often more cost-competitive. Steel tendons typically used for drill-and-grout soil nails usually consist of 3⁄4- to 2-indiameter (20- to 50-mm) bars with a yield strength in the range of 60 to 70 kips/in2 (420 to 500 N/mm2). These steels exhibit ductile behavior under bending action. The driven nails used commonly in France are typically steel angle sections, which show better ability to deal with subsurface obstructions such as cobbles and small boulders than do circular steel sections. Drainage is a critical aspect of soil nail wall construction. Face drainage is virtually always used with permanent walls, and very commonly used with temporary walls. Face drainage usually consists of synthetic drainage elements placed between the shotcrete and the retained soil, and may be typically 8- to 12-in-wide (200- to 300-mm) synthetic strips or perforated pipes. Depending on the site groundwater conditions, face drainage may be supplemented with weep holes through the facing and longer horizontal perforated drain pipes. Control of surface water is also an important element of the drainage system. Temporary soil nail wall facings generally consist of shotcrete 3 to 4 in (80 to 100 mm) thick and a single layer of wire mesh. Permanent shotcrete walls 6 to 10 in (150 to 250 mm) thick are very common in Germany, and these walls typically include a second layer of wire mesh. For architectural reasons, permanent walls of precast panels and cast-inplace concrete are also commonly used in France and Germany. Testing and monitoring during construction are an important aspect of soil nail wall construction in Europe. Nail bond testing is almost universally performed, to confirm the assumptions made during design or to enable redesign in the event that the design assumptions cannot be realized. For relatively homogeneous sites, typically 3 to 5 percent of the nails will be tested, depending on the size of the job. Testing is also undertaken whenever changed geologic or construction conditions occur. Wall performance monitoring usually consists of measuring horizontal wall movements during construction. Some contractors make more use of inclinometers for displacement monitoring. Maximum horizontal displacements are typically in the range of 0.1 to 0.3 percent of the height of the wall, depending on ground conditions. Strain gauging of nails, together with the use of load cells at the nail head, is usually reserved for experimental walls. The level of quality assurance and control monitoring varies significantly. In Germany, for example, the QA-QC inspector might be on the job from 10 percent to full time. Overall, soil nail wall performance in Europe has been very good. Problems during construction have typically been associated with encountering loose fill, granular soil with no apparent cohesion, water, and constructed obstructions such as utility trenches. Other problems have been associated with a contractor’s failing to construct the wall in accordance with the plans and specifications (e.g., eliminating nails, overexcavation of lifts). Frost action on fully bonded nails has also resulted in development of very large loads near the head of the nail, where no insulating protection has been provided in the wall design.

8.8.8 Soil Nailed Wall Facing Design Procedure The following typical details and design procedure are based primarily on Caltrans’ method for use on highway construction, but the method is very similar to other methods presently in practice. Design facing pressures are based on the French Clouterre empirical method. The cast-in-place portion of the facing is designed for this pressure for permanent

760

CHAPTER EIGHT 4″ shotcrete (ignore for facing design) 8″ CIP facing

Note: Try this wall section with #6 @ 12″ horiz. and vert. f′c = 3250 lb/in2

RWCL 3″ cl. 2″ cl.

WWF 6×6-W4.0×W4.0 112 ″ cl.

Geocomposite drain #4 cont. tot. 2 CL soil nail

#6 @ 12″ Compression face for negative bending

Compression face for positive bending

–dh = 3.38″ –dv = 4.13″

+d h = 4.62″ +d v = 3.87″ Negative steel –dh = 3 + 0.75 = 3.38″ Controls 2 –dh = 3 + 1.5 × 0.75 = 4.13″ Positive steel +dh = 8 – 3.38 = 4.62″

Note: d h and d v are effective horizontal distances to the horizontal and vertical steel, respectively.

+d = 8 – 4.13 = 3.87″ FIGURE 8.57 Section through facing of soil nailed wall showing concrete reinforcement and soil nail connection. (From J. W. Keeley, Soil Nail Wall Facing: Sample Design Calculations, Federal Highway Administration, 1993, with permission)

walls only. The strength of the shotcrete construction facing is ignored. Only the ultimate limit state is addressed; no serviceability calculations are made for cracking or deflections. Sample design calculations are illustrated following the presentation of the procedure. Typical Details.

(See Figs. 8.57 to 8.59.)

1. Use a shotcrete layer with a 4-in (100-mm) minimum thickness. 2. Include a single layer of welded wire fabric at mid-thickness. Common options are: 6 6-W4.0 W4.0 (4 gauge wire; diameter, 0.225 in; cross-section area 0.080 in2/ft or 0.17 mm2/mm) 4 4-W2.9 W2.9 (6 gauge wire; diameter, 0.192 in; cross-section area 0.087 in2/ft or 0.18 mm2/mm) 3. Use two continuous horizontal no. 4 grade 60 reinforcing steel bars at each nail.

Use PL 1″ × 9″ × 9″ dh = dnail +

1 4″

b = 1″ b 2

–

dh 2

= Cantilever design section for plate f′c = 3250 lb/in2 fy bearing plate = 36 kips/in2 dnail = 1.00″ (#8) dh = 1.25″

b FIGURE 8.58 Bearing plate for soil nailed wall showing cantilever strip for calculations. (From J. W. Keeley, Soil Nail Wall Facing: Sample Design Calculations, Federal Highway Administration, 1993, with permission)

2.76″

1.81″ CL

5.88″

soil nail

4.88″

6.19″

8″ CIP facing

2.12″

1.38″

0.31″

45° 1″

3″

1.5″

9″ R = 5.88″+ 0.50″= 6.38″ Edge of equivalent square 5.65″ =

5.65″

6″

π6.382 2

2.76″

17.30″ Effective stress area = A cp = 17.302 – 2.762 = 291.7 in2 FIGURE 8.59 Bearing plate for soil nailed wall showing effective stress area for embedment design capacity. (From J. W. Keeley, Soil Nail Wall Facing: Sample Design Calculations, Federal Highway Administration, 1993, with permission)

761

762

CHAPTER EIGHT

4. Use 1-ft-wide (300-mm) vertical geocomposite drain between nails; connect the geocomposite drain to a 2-in-round (600-mm) plastic weep hole outlet drain just above finished grade near the bottom of the wall. 5. Place the ASTM A36 steel nail bearing plate, 1 in 9 in 9 in (25 225 225 mm) with wedge washer and nut on the outside face of the shotcrete; set into place before the shotcrete hardens. Add studs to this plate to engage permanent facings that are placed over this initial shotcrete layer. Step 1: 4-in (100-mm) Shotcrete Construction Facing. This is the only facing required for temporary walls (service life less than 18 months) and the first portion required for permanent walls. It is placed immediately after each stage of excavation and nail placement. Current AASHTO and American Concrete Institute (ACI) codes do not address the loadings or the structural capacities for this facing. Therefore, many current designs rely on details that have shown good performance on previous projects rather than design calculations. Step 2: 8-in (200-mm) CIP Permanent Facing—Compute Design Nail Load and Pressure at Facing. The design nail load at the facing is computed for the given nail size, steel grade, and nail spacing according to the French Clouterre empirical method. The French determined through field tests that the nail load at the facing (T0) did not exceed about one-half the maximum nail load (Tmax) near the soil failure surface. They established a design nail load for the facing that varies from 0.6 times Tmax for closely spaced nails to 1.0 times Tmax for larger nail spacings. Tmax is the ultimate limit state established for the nail tension (Caltrans procedure) at 0.75 fy (Tmax Anail 0.75 fy), where fy is the yield strength of the nail. The design pressure for the facing is then simply the design nail load at the facing (T0) divided by the nail tributary facing area (i.e., horizontal nail spacing times vertical nail spacing). Step 3: 8-in CIP Permanent Facing—Design for Flexure. The cast-in-place facing is designed so that its ultimate strength is greater than the moments in the facing computed by simple continuous beam equations for the facing pressure from T0. Only one layer of grade 60 reinforcing steel placed near the middle of the section is used. (See Fig. 8.57.) The controlling d is used for the ultimate strength computation. Step 4: 8-in CIP Permanent Facing—Nail Connection Design. The connection of the nail to the cast-in-place facing is designed to carry the nail’s ultimate limit state in tension, Tmax. The nail bearing plate is sized to limit the bearing pressure from Tmax to the ultimate value allowed by AASHTO (0.6f ′c). The plate thickness is determined to provide sufficient bending strength for the moment from the bearing pressure about the nail nut. Studs are welded to the bearing plate to carry Tmax entirely by the 8-in (200-mm) CIP permanent facing. The ultimate punching shear capacity of the steel embedment is computed according to American Concrete Institute specifications. Sample Design Calculations for Soil Nail Wall Facing (Based on Caltrans Methods) Step 1: 4-in Shotcrete Construction Facing. Details as previously described may be used. Step 2: 8-in CIP Permanent Facing—Concrete Design Nail Load and Pressure at Facing. Given No. 8 nails; fy 60 kips/in2; Anail 0.79 in2; horizontal nail spacing Sh 6 ft; and vertical nail spacing Sv 6 ft. Begin by calculating the design nail loads. Tmax design nail load at soil failure surface at ultimate limit state 0.75fy Anail 0.75 60 0.79 35.6 kips

763

RETAINING WALLS

T0 design nail load at facing at ultimate limit state 0.3Smax 0.5 T0 0.5 5 Tmax

for

Smax in ft

(Note: This is the French Clouterre equation.) 0.3Smax 0.5 T0 Tmax 0.5 5

冢

冣

冢

冣

0.3 6 0.5 35.6 0.5 27.0 kips 5 The design nail load T0 is then used to calculate the facing design pressure. Wu facing design pressure at ultimate limit state T0 27.0 0.75 kip/ft2 ShSv 66 Step 3: 8-in CIP Permanent Facing—Design for Flexure. Note: Try this wall section with No. 6 reinforcing bars spaced at 12 in horizontally and vertically; f c 3250 lb/in2. Required ultimate moment per foot (horizontal and vertical; positive and negative)

冢冣

62 l2 Mu Wu 0.75 2.7 ft kips/ft 10 10 Ultimate design capacity for trial section 8-in CIP permanent facing b 12 in per ft of design width f c 3250 lb/in2 fy 60 kips/in2 d 3.38 in (see Fig. 8.57) As 0.44 in2 (No. 6 @12 in) area of steel fy As 0.44 60 a 0.80 in 0.85 f cb 0.85 3.25 12 depth of concrete compression

764

CHAPTER EIGHT

A strength reduction factor of 0.90 is applied to the nominal moment strength Mn as follows:

冢

a Mn As fy d 2

冣冢

冣

1 0.80 0.9 0.44 60 3.38 5.9 ft kips/ft 2.7 2 12

OK

Check of minimum steel requirements. According to AASHTO, the tension reinforcement must be equal to or greater than the lesser of that required to develop a moment (1) 1.2 times the cracking moment (based on the gross section modulus Sg) and (2) 1.33 times that required by analysis for the specified loading conditions. This leads to the following equations for the cross-section area of the reinforcement: 1.2 Sg 7.5兹f苶´c As fy 0.9d 1.33 Mu As fy 0.9d The strength reduction factor is 0.90. Substitution gives the following results: 1.2(12 82/6)7.5兹3 苶2苶5苶0苶 As 0.40 in2/ft 0.9 60,000 0.9 3.38 and

1.33(2.7 12,000) As 0.26 in2/ft 0.9 60,000 0.9 3.38

Thus, As must be at least 0.26 in2/ft to meet these requirements. For temperature and shrinkage, minimum As is 0.13 in2/ft (No. 4 @18 in). The final selection is No. 6 reinforcing bars spaced at 12 in, which provides As of 0.44 in2/ft, a nominal level of reinforcing. For complete designs, also check cantilever sections at the top and bottom of the wall and any other special facing sections, such as at expansion or contraction joints. Step 4: 8-in CIP Permanent Facing—Nail Connection Design Design bearing plate at ultimate limit state for Tmax Tmax 0.75fy Anail 0.75 60 0.79 35.6 kips Calculate the ultimate concrete bearing strength under the plate using a strength reduction factor of 0.70. Therefore, Ultimate concrete bearing strength 0.85f c 0.60f c min dh2 “A” bearing b2 4

765

RETAINING WALLS

35.6 Required “A” bearing 18.26 in2 0.6 3.25 1.252 Available “A” bearing 92 79.8 in2 4

OK

35.6 Bearing stress under plate 0.45 kip/in2 79.8 Allowable stress 0.6 3.25 1.95

OK

1 1 l (b dh) (9 1.25) 3.875 in 2 2

t required l

冪莦

3.33w 3.875 fy

t available 1 in

冪莦

3.33 0.45 0.79 in 36

OK

Note: wl2/2 0.9fy t2/6 Therefore, tl

冪莦 3.33w fy

where w ultimate bearing pressure. Required steel area for studs to resist Tmax. The design strength of the stud fds is determined as the lesser of (1) the stud yield strength (fy 50 kips/in2) multiplied by a strength reduction factor of 0.90 and (2) 80 percent of the stud tensile strength (fu 60 kips/in2). Therefore, fds min [fy; 0.8fu] fy 0.9 50 45 kips/in2 0.8fu 0.8 60 48 kips/in2 Therefore fds 45 kips/in2 Tmax Required stud area As fds 35.6 0.79 in2 45

766

CHAPTER EIGHT

Try 4 1⁄2-in studs. As 4 0.196 0.79 in2

OK

Check of anchor head bearing for 1⁄2-in ␾ stud. ds 0.5 in. Determine head area Ah.

冢冣

d Ah h 2

2

0.79 in2 (manufacturer’s data, dh 1)

A 0.79 h 4 2.5 As 0.196

OK

Th 0.312 in 0.25 in Head thickness is OK. Ultimate connection embedment design capacity Pd Pd 4兹f 苶c苶 Acp f c 3250 lb/in2 0.65 strength reduction factor in this case Acp 291.7 in2 effective stress area (see Fig. 8.59) 1 Pd 4 0.65 兹3 苶2苶5苶0苶 291.7 43.2 kips 1000 Pd Tmax 35.6 kips

OK

8.8.9 Global Stability Evaluation of a global safety factor that includes the nailed soil and the surrounding ground requires determination of the critical sliding surface. This surface may be located totally inside, totally outside, or part inside and part outside the nailed zone. Limit equilibrium methods are usually used, and the Davis method is recommended because of its simplicity and availability in the public domain (C. K. Shen et al., “Field Measurements of an Earth Support System,” Journal of the Geotechnical Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, vol. 107, no. 12, 1981). The Davis method has been modified (V. Elias and I. Juran, “Soil Nailing,” Report for FHWA, DTFH 61-85-C, 1988) to permit input of interface limit lateral shear forces obtained from pullout tests, separate geometric and strength data for each nail, facing inclination, and a ground slope at the top of the wall. The concrete facing elements (shotcrete, cast-in-place concrete, or prefabricated panels) are considered for design to be analogous to a beam or raft of a unit width equal to the nail spacing supported by the nails.

8.8.10 Contracting Practices Although procurement and contracting practices vary among the European countries, there are some common elements that tend to distinguish European practices from those in the United States. These include (1) strong industry, academic, and government

RETAINING WALLS

767

cooperation in research and development and the introduction of new technologies; (2) a partnering approach among all parties involved in a particular project; (3) less litigation; and (4) a high level of contractor involvement in the conceptualization and design phases, as well as during construction. In France, the contractor design-build approach appears to be dominant. For public agency work, a prequalified group of contractors are typically asked to prepare a final design and bid, based on a preliminary design prepared by the owner or the owner’s consultant. Alternative designs may also be prepared by the contractor at this time, and may be selected if they are technically and financially viable and meet the overall performance and scheduling requirements of the project. French contractors tend to be much larger and stronger than their U.S. counterparts, and the major groups tend to support significant research and development efforts. Contractor-consultant-academicgovernment cooperation in areas requiring major research and development is particularly well developed in France. In Germany, public agency work is again usually bid on a conceptual or preliminary design prepared by or for the agency, with the contractor required to submit a bid on the original design and also encouraged to submit any alternative design that will provide an equivalent wall at a reduced price. Ultimately, award is made for the lowestcost responsive bid. Soil nailing in Germany requires the involvement of one of a small group of prequalified or “licensed” contractor organizations. As in France, these contractors tend to be technically and financially very strong. Private work, like public work, tends to be awarded on the basis of low bid. Based on the European, and particularly the French, experience, two main recommendations are offered for encouraging the development of innovative construction methods and improving the construction performance for such methods. First, stronger and more formal government-academic-industry cooperation should be established to develop new technologies and disseminate the information in a nonproprietary manner. This should also include participating in corresponding European programs when the opportunity arises and when the information will be of mutual benefit. Second, alternative bidding, including contractor design-build alternatives, performance-oriented specifications, and the use of carefully prequalified specialty contractors, should be encouraged.

8.9 PREFABRICATED MODULAR WALLS There are also a number of prefabricated modular wall systems in use. Such systems are generally composed of modules or bins filled with soil, and function much like gravity retaining walls. The bins may be of concrete or steel, and can be used in most cases where conventional gravity, cantilever, or other wall systems are considered. AASHTO indicates that such walls should not be used on curves less than 800 ft in radius, unless a series of chords can be substituted; or where the calculated longitudinal differential settlement along the face of the wall is excessive. Also, durability considerations must be addressed, particularly where acidic water or deicing spray is anticipated.

8.10 MSE BRIDGE ABUTMENT WALLS The abutment wall is an earth-retaining wall supporting traffic surcharge load and heavy loads from the bridge superstructure. The geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) earth-retaining wall is a subset of the MSE wall. The technology of GRS systems has

768

CHAPTER EIGHT

been used extensively in transportation systems including earth-retaining walls, roadway pavement subgrades, and foundation improvement for heavy traffic loads such as bridge abutments. The increasing use and acceptance of geosynthetic soil reinforcement has been triggered by a number of factors, including cost savings, aesthetics, simple and fast construction techniques, and excellent performance. A comparatively new application of this technology is the use of GRS in bridge abutments and roadway approaches. When compared to conventional bridge substructures involving the use of deep foundations to support bridge abutments, the use of geosynthetic-reinforced soil systems has the potential for alleviating the “bump at the bridge” problem caused by differential settlements between the bridge abutment and the approaching roadway. It is especially effective where the GRS can be extended beyond the typical rectangular reinforcing zone of the wall and truncated gradually into a trapezoidal reinforcing zone toward the approach roadway. The FHWA published preliminary design details for bridge superstructures directly supported by MSE walls with panel facings and steel reinforcements in 1997 (Elias and Christopher, 1997), and it was included in the AASHTO 1998 Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. A recently published FHWA report (FHWA, 2000) describes three studies on GRS bridge-supporting structures: a load test of the Turner-Fairbank pier in McLean, Virginia, in 1996; a load test of the Havana Yard piers and abutment in Denver, Colorado, in 1996–1997; and a study of a production bridge abutment constructed in Black Hawk, Colorado, in 1997. These studies have demonstrated excellent performances with negligible creep deformations of GRS bridge-supporting structures constructed with closely spaced reinforcements and well-compacted granular backfill. The maximum surcharge pressure was 4.2 kip/ft2 (200 kPa). This FHWA report concluded that the GRS abutments are clearly viable and adequate alternatives to bridge abutments supported by deep foundations or by metallic reinforced soil abutments. A complete literature overview of studies on GRS structures supporting high-surcharge loads has been presented (Abu-Hejleh et al., 2000). The most prominent GRS abutment for bridge support in the United States is the new Founders/Meadows Parkway structure, located 20 mi south of Denver, Colorado, which carries Colorado State Highway 86 over U.S. Interstate 25 (Fig. 8.60). This is the first major bridge in the United States built on spread footings supported by a concrete block facing geosynthetic-reinforced soil system, eliminating the use of traditional deep foundations (piles and caissons) altogether. Figure 8.61 shows the bridge superstructure supported by the “front GRS wall,” which extends around a 90° curved corner in a “lower GRS wall” that supports a “concrete wing wall” and a second-tier “upper GRS wall.” Figure 8.62 shows a plan view of the completed two-span bridge and approaching roadway structures. Each span of the new bridge is 113 ft (34.5 m) long and 113 ft (34.5 m) wide, with 20 side-by-side, precast, prestressed, concrete box girders. There are three monitored cross-sections (sections 200, 400, and 800) along the faces of the “front GRS wall” and “abutment wall.” Figure 8.63 depicts a typical monitored cross-section with various wall components and drainage features in the backfill. To keep the water out of the GRS, several drainage systems were used in the trapezoidal extended reinforcing zone, including an impervious membrane and collecting drain at the top and a drainage blanket and pipe drain near the toe of the embankment cut slope. Figure 8.63 also illustrates how the bridge superstructure loads (from bridge deck to girders) are transmitted through the girder seat to a shallow strip footing placed directly on the top of a geogrid-reinforced concrete block facing earth retaining wall. The centerline of the abutment bearing and edge of the footer are located 10 ft (3.1 m) and 4.4 ft (1.35 m), respectively, from the facing of the front GRS wall. This short reinforced-concrete abutment wall supports the bridge superstructure, including two winged walls cantilevered from the abutment. This wall, with a continuous neoprene sliding and bearing interface at the bottom, rests on the center of the spread footing.

769

RETAINING WALLS

FIGURE 8.60 View of Founders/Meadows Bridge near Denver, Colorado. (From Research Report, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

Girder

Wing Wall

Instrumentation Box Upper GRS Wall

Front GRS Wall

Lower GRS Wall

FIGURE 8.61 View of southeast side of the Founders/Meadows bridge abutment. (From Research Report, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

770

CHAPTER EIGHT

FIGURE 8.62 Plan view of the Founders/Meadows structure showing the locations of monitored sections (200, 400, and 800) and construction phases (I and II). (From Research Report, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

It confines the reinforced backfill soil behind the bridge abutment (see Figs. 8.61 and 8.63) and also partially supports the bridge approach slab. The old bridge was maintained in service during construction of the new bridge. A phased construction of the almost 9-m-high (29-ft), two-tier, U-shaped abutments began in July 1998, and the bridge was completed in just 12 months. This included a temporary bracing at the south side of the replaced bridge and a temporary GRS wall at the north of phase 1 of the partial new bridge. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) designed the Founders/Meadows structure in 1996, 1 year before the FHWA report of Elias and Christopher (1997) was published. It was expected that water could be kept out of the claystone bedrock formation below the base of the reinforced backfill, and that the use of an extended reinforced transition zone (Fig. 8.63) would lead to adequate overall stability for the structure and minimize settlements of the GRS wall system. Several of the common causes for development of bridge bumps were avoided or eliminated completely in the design of the Founders/Meadows structure. The main cause of uneven settlements in typical systems is the use of different foundation types. While the approaching roadway structure is constructed on compacted backfill, deep foundations such as steel H piles typically are adopted to transfer the heavy bridge abutment loads to bedrock or competent bearing strata. At the Founders/Meadows structure, in order to minimize uneven settlements between the bridge and the approaching roadway, the approach embankment and the bridge abutment wall backfills were further integrated into an extended reinforced soil zone (Fig. 8.63). A second cause of differential settlements is erosion of the fill material behind and around the abutment wall induced by the surface water runoff collected from the bridge deck.

Cap Unit (0.1 m high) Front GRS Wall 22 Rows for Section 200 (4.5 m high) 2m 29 Rows for Sections 400, 800 (5.9 m high)

2.055 m

(3.81 m x 0.61 m)

UX3

Membrane & Collector Pipe 75-mm Expanded Polystyrene

Connector

CDOT Class 1 Backfill

UX6 Geogrid

0.4 m

UX6 Geogrid

7.8 m

Bedrock

The geogrid reinforcement length increases linearly from 8 m at the bottom with 1:1 slope toward the top

Drainage Blanket with Pipe Drains

Geogrid 1st-Layer Embedment Length Is 8 m

Leveling Pad (0.15 m high)

UX2

Roadway (0.35 m high)

UX3 Geogrid

UX3

Sleeper Foundation

0.4 m high

Approach Slab (3.72 m x 0.3 m )

Width of the Reinforced Soil Zone, 11 m for Section 200, 12.97 m for Sections 400 and 600

0.3-m limit of 19-mm Max. Size Crushed Stone

1.755 m

Foundation

Block Unit (0.2 m high)

1.35 m

Slope Paving

Girder (0.89 m high)

Bridge Deck (0.13 m high)

Abutment Wall (0.76 m wide)

FIGURE 8.63 Typical monitored cross-section through front and abutment GRS walls showing layout and materials. (From Research Report, Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, Colo., with permission)

0.45-m Min. Embedment

771

772

CHAPTER EIGHT

Several measures were implemented to prevent the peculation of surface water, as well as intercepted groundwater, from reaching the reinforced soil mass and the bedrock at the base of the fill (e.g., placement of impervious membranes with collector pipes as shown in Fig. 8.63). Finally, a third potential cause of differential settlements is seasonal temperature changes, which may induce expansion and contraction of the bridge superstructure with the abutment back wall pushed against the reinforced fills. A 3-in-thick (75-mm) low-density, compressible expanded polystyrene sheet spacer was installed between the reinforced backfill and the abutment back walls (see Fig. 8.63). It was expected that this system would isolate the thermally induced cyclic movements of the bridge superstructure without affecting the retained reinforced backfill. The performance of bridge structures supported by GRS abutments had not been tested under actual service conditions to merit acceptance without reservation in highway construction. Consequently, the Founders/Meadows structure was considered experimental and comprehensive material testing, instrumentation, and monitoring programs were incorporated into the construction operations. Three sections of the GRS system were instrumented to provide information on the structure movements, soil stresses, geogrid strains, and moisture content during construction and even after opening the structure to traffic. The results gathered from the instrumentation program verified the suitability of CDOT and AASHTO design procedures and assumptions regarding the use of GRS walls to support bridge abutments and as a measure to alleviate the bridge bump problem. Several CDOT research reports present a summary, analysis, and assessment of all the movement results of the Founders/Meadows structure, collected at various construction stages and while the structure was in service for approximately 35 months after opening to traffic. These results include displacements of the front wall facing, settlement of the bridge footing, and differential settlements between the bridge and approaching roadway structures. These reports also provide recommendations for future design and construction of GRS abutments directly supporting bridge and approaching roadway structures. The unique features of the Founders/Meadows Bridge, and other perceived advantages of GRS walls commonly used in Colorado, as well as the excellent performance of full-scale GRS abutments and piers in monitoring programs, convinced CDOT engineers of the feasibility of GRS earth-retaining walls and abutments.

8.11 REFERENCE MATERIAL The following reference sources were helpful in developing this chapter: Abu-Hejleh, N., Outcalt, S., Wang, T., and Zornberg, J., “Performance of GeosyntheticReinforced Walls Supporting the Founders/Meadows Bridge and Approaching Roadway Structures, Report 1: Design, Materials, Construction, Instrumentation, and Preliminary Results,” Report No. CDOT-DTD-R-2000-5, Colorado Department of Transportation, 2000. Allen, T., and Bathurst R., “Application of The K0-Stiffness Method to Reinforced Soil Wall Limit States Sesign,” Report No. WA-RD 528.1, Washington State Department of Transportation, 2001. Bridge Design Manual, Colorado Department of Transportation, Section 5, “Earth Retaining Wall Design Requirements.” Claybourn, A. F., Comparison of Design Methods for Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil Walls, Woodward-Clyde Federal Services. Clough, G. W. and Duncan, J. M., “Earth Pressures,” Chapter 6 in Foundation Engineering Handbook, Fang, H. Y., Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1991. Design Manual, Part 4, “Structures,” Section 5, “Retaining Walls,” Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation.

RETAINING WALLS

773

“Durability/Corrosion of Soil Reinforced Structures,” Federal Highway Administration Report RD-89-186, December 1990. Elias, V., and B. R. Christopher, “Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slope, Design and Construction Guidelines,” FHWA Demo Project 82-1, Washington, D.C., 1997. Elias, V., and I. Juran, “Soil Nailing,” report for Federal Highway Administration, DTFH 61-85-c, 1988. FHWA, “GRS Bridge Pier and Abutments,” FHWA-RD-00-038 (sponsored by Turner-Fairbanks Highway Research Center), Washington, D.C., 2000. Geosystems for Highways and Transportation Structures: Guide to Selection, Design and Construction, Colorado Department of Transportation, June 1992. Harned, C. H., Some Practical Aspects of Foundation Studies for Highway Bridges, Bureau of Public Roads, January 1959. Keeley, J. W., Soil Nail Wall Facing: Sample Design Calculations, Federal Highway Administration, 1993. LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 2007, American Association of State Highway Officials. Mitchell, J. K., and B. R. Christopher, “North American Practice in Reinforced Soil Systems,” Proceedings, Specialty Conference on Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures, Geotechnical Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1990. Recommendations Clouterre, 1991, French National Research, Project Clouterre (English translation, 1993, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration). Shen, C. K., et al., “Field Measurements of an Earth Support System,” Journal of the Geotechnical Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, vol. 107, no. 12, 1981. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 2002, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Section 5, “Retaining Walls.”

CHAPTER 9

NOISE BARRIERS James J. Hill, P.E. Structural Engineer Consultant Anoka, Minnesota

Roger L. Brockenbrough, P.E. President R. L. Brockenbrough & Associates, Inc. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

During recent years, there has been increasing concern over noise generated by highway traffic in urban areas. Noise abatement programs have been implemented by many agencies. Source control methods have included the development of quieter pavements, quieter tire tread patterns, and speed restrictions. In some regions, noise levels have been reduced by depressing roadways or building tunnels, or by special designs of adjacent buildings. In many cases, however, noise reduction has been achieved through controlling the noise path by the design and construction of noise barriers. Sometimes referred to as sound barriers or noise walls, these longitudinal walls are built specifically to reduce traffic noise. In addition to their primary purpose, noise barriers are sometimes adopted to shield unsightly areas from the public and restore a feeling of visual privacy. A noise barrier project involves many areas including acoustical evaluations, consideration of aesthetics, cost evaluations, roadway safety design, structural design, foundation design, and construction. This chapter includes information from the following sources: S. H. Godfrey and B. Storey, Highway Noise Barriers: 1994 Survey of Practice, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1995; D. Byers, “Noise Wall Aesthetics: New Jersey Case Study,” presentation, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1995; Guide on Evaluation and Abatement of Traffic Noise, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Washington, D.C., 1993; Guide Specifications for Structural Design of Sound Barriers, AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 1989, and Interim Revisions, 1992 and 2002; and Road Design Manual, Minnesota Department of Transportation, 2008.

775

776

CHAPTER NINE

9.1 ACOUSTICAL CONCEPTS Figure 9.1 illustrates the fundamental function of a noise barrier. The noise source is traffic, particularly large truck traffic, which generates noise by the action of tires on pavement, the drive train, the engine, and the exhaust. The receiver or receptor can be defined as the location where land use results in exposure to highway traffic noise for an hour or more per day. It may typically be set at 5 ft (1.5 m) above ground or at window level. Acoustical design includes controlling noise that passes over the wall and is diffracted to the receiver, noise that is transmitted through the wall, and noise that is reflected from the wall. Noise levels are expressed in dBA, decibels measured with a frequency weighting network corresponding to the A scale on a standard sound-level meter. The ease of attaining increasing levels of attenuation has been estimated as follows: 5 dBA: simple 10 dBA: attainable 15 dBA: very difficult 20 dBA: nearly impossible Designs for reductions greater than 15 dBA are usually not considered feasible because of unpredictable and uncontrollable atmospheric and terrain surface effects, scattering from trees and buildings, and other unknowns. Diffracted Noise. The noise that passes over the barrier, which is the most important of the three types of noise, depends on the location and height of the barrier. Attenuation is directly related to the difference between the length of the path from the source to the receiver in the absence of a noise barrier, and the length of the path from the source over the top of the wall to the receiver by diffraction. At a given distance from the roadway, increasing the barrier height increases the attenuation achieved. However, this relationship is obviously nonlinear, and as the height of the barrier increases above some reasonable value, the attenuation that can be achieved decreases rapidly. Assuming a barrier height that just breaks the line of sight from the source to the receiver, and assuming that such a barrier provides a 5-dBA attenuation, a rule of thumb is to assume that an attenuation of 1⁄2 dBA can be achieved with each additional foot of barrier height. But because the relationship is actually nonlinear, this approximation holds for only a limited range. Sometimes it is possible to take advantage of local terrain and locate a noise barrier on a

FIGURE 9.1 Acoustical concept of noise wall. (From Handbook of Steel Drainage and Highway Construction Products, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., 1994, with permission)

NOISE BARRIERS

777

stretch of land at a higher elevation. This reduces the required height and cost. Barrier heights are generally in the range of 6 to 25 ft (2 to 7.5 m). They are generally effective in reducing noise for receptors within approximately 200 ft (60 m) of a highway. Traffic generates sound waves longitudinally as well as laterally. Thus, care must be taken to extend the length of the barrier sufficiently to achieve the desired end result. A rule of thumb states that the noise barrier should extend, in each direction from the boundaries of the receiver, 4 times the distance from the receiver to the noise wall. This length can be reduced by combining the ends of the barrier with other features, such as natural knolls, or by flaring the wall toward the land use area to form a barrier to the longitudinal sound waves. Transmitted Noise. The noise that passes through the barrier depends on its surface characteristics and composition (density). Acoustical performance can be determined by testing in accordance with standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials (Test Designation E90). It is important that the wall not contain gaps or holes. Overlapping sections can be used to accommodate access through the wall for maintenance or other personnel when applicable. In such cases, the overlap should be at least 2.5 to 3 times the width of the opening. Reflected Noise. There is a possibility that noise barrier effectiveness can be reduced by reflected noise, such as where longitudinal walls are located on either side of the roadway. To avoid this situation, it has been recommended that the width between two parallel barriers be at least 10 times the average height of the barrier above the roadway.

9.2 ACOUSTICAL STANDARDS AND DESIGN Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations for mitigation of highway traffic noise in the planning and design of federally aided highways are contained in Title 23 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772. Requirements during the planning and design of a highway project include identification of traffic noise impacts, examination of potential mitigation measures, inclusion of reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures, and coordination with local officials. The regulations contain noise abatement criteria for different types of land uses and human activities. Reasonable and feasible efforts must be made to provide noise mitigation when the criteria are exceeded. Compliance with the regulations is a prerequisite for securing federal-aid highway funds for construction or reconstruction of highways. Further details may be found in the FHWA Noise Standards. Computer programs based on mathematical models have proven very useful for predicting noise levels and designing noise barriers. The FHWA has released an entirely new, state-of-the-art computer program known as TNM® that provides a traffic noise model for predicting noise impacts in the vicinity of highways. Replacing older models (Stamina and Optima), the new program uses advances in personal computers and software to improve the accuracy and ease of modeling highway noise, and the design of effective, cost-efficient highway noise barriers. Included are the following components: • Modeling of five standard vehicle types, including automobiles, medium trucks, heavy trucks, buses, and motorcycles, as well as user-defined vehicles • Modeling of both constant-flow and interrupted-flow traffic using a 1994/1995 field-measured database • Modeling of the effects of different pavement types, as well as the effects of graded roadways

778

• • • • • •

CHAPTER NINE

Sound level computations based on one-third octave-band database and algorithms Graphically interactive noise barrier design and optimization Attenuation over/through rows of buildings and dense vegetation Multiple diffraction analysis Parallel barrier analysis Contour analysis, including sound level contours, barrier insertion loss contours, and sound-level difference contours

Local criteria may be more restrictive than federal criteria. In Minnesota, for example, daytime criteria in residential areas are an hourly L10 of 65 dBA and an hourly L50 of 60 dBA. L10 refers to the sound level that is exceeded 10 percent of the time over the period under consideration (1 h, in this case); L50 refers to the level exceeded 50 percent of the time. Noise abatement projects strive for a minimum reduction of 10 dBA in L10 and 6 dBA in L50 from existing traffic noise levels.

9.3 TYPES OF NOISE BARRIERS Except for berms and brick or masonry construction, most noise barriers are of post-andpanel construction, that is, vertical posts spaced a distance apart with horizontal or vertical panels running in between. Rails or girts may also run between the posts to support the panels. Posts are embedded in the foundation soil to design depth, which depends on wind loading, soil properties, and frost depth. Brick and masonry walls generally require spread footings, underlain with uniform layers of soil. According to a 2006 FHWA survey, the main materials that have been used for noise wall construction, in order of usage, are the following: ● ● ● ● ●

Concrete Block and brick Wood Metal Earth berms

Other materials sometimes used include plastic, glass, composites, and gabions (rockfilled wire baskets). Glass and clear plastic are alternatives where it is desirable to not block scenic views. Concrete. Users indicate that selection has been based on cost, durability, low maintenance, surface treatments available, and acoustical properties. Concrete walls can be precast, cast in place, or of post-and-panel construction. Precast concrete panels may be of either prestressed or reinforced construction. Various surface finishes such as texturing are available and are relatively inexpensive. A 4-in-thick (100 mm) wall provides a relatively high transmission reduction of 32 dBA. Block and Brick. Brick and masonry construction is also popular, mainly because of its pleasing appearance and acoustical properties. However, initial cost is likely to be higher, depending upon the geographic location, as well as repair cost if damaged. Slump block, cinder block, stone, and brick have all been used. Units can be arranged to produce various patterns. The typical transmission loss is 33 dBA, and this can be improved by the addition of mineral wool or fiberglass to the wall interior.

NOISE BARRIERS

779

Wood. Attributes that favor selection include favorable cost, ease of construction, aesthetic appeal, and availability. Disadvantages include shrinkage, warpage, deterioration, difficulty of quality control, discoloration around fasteners, and low resistance to vandalism. Wooden walls have been constructed from timbers, planks, plywood, and laminated products. Often, these materials are used for the panels or facing and concrete or steel is used for the posts. Tongue-and-groove construction should be used for panels running between posts to eliminate gaps. The durability of wooden walls can be enhanced by using materials that have received a pressure preservative treatment. Wood provides a transmission loss of 18 to 23 dBA/in (0.72 to 0.92 dBA/mm) of thickness. Metal. Metal walls, primarily of cold-formed steel sheet, can be used as stand-alone barriers or in combination with berms. Low cost, maintainability, and ease of construction favor use of steel. Disadvantages include vibration problems, denting, and ineffectiveness in the low-frequency range. For steel construction, the panels are fluted (have rectangular corrugations) vertically or horizontally, with a channel-shaped cap at the top. Prepainted galvanized sheet and weathering steel have been used, and other durability treatments are available. The transmission reduction is generally between 10 and 22 dBA. Earth Berms. Earth berms or mounds are preferred by some. Natural appearance, favorable cost, ready availability of the material, low maintenance cost, and acoustical efficiency favor their selection. A disadvantage is the space needed for construction, particularly in view of safety requirements. Sometimes soil is used in combination with a wall where space is limited. For example, if there is not enough space to achieve the full desired height with a berm, a noise barrier can be located on top of a berm of lower height. Berm side slopes of 4:1 or flatter are desirable on the basis of considerations of safety (see Art. 6.2), roadside maintenance, and wall stability. Some states permit up to 3:1, depending on lateral location. Both acoustics and aesthetics can be improved when the berm is combined with a dense planting of vegetation. Vegetation with a minimum depth of 100 ft (30 m) (perpendicular to roadway), height of 15 ft (4.5 m), and density such that there is no clear path between the highway and the adjacent land use areas can result in a noise level reduction of up to 5 or 6 dBA. Existing soils must be capable of supporting the added berm load. Proprietary Systems. There are a number of proprietary systems on the market. Some products have included recycled materials such as tire rubber, wood processing waste, and plastics. Of course, steel and aluminum products contain a very high level of recycled metal.

9.4 NOISE BARRIER SELECTION Presuming acoustical requirements are met, selection is usually based on cost and aesthetics. Costs that must be considered include site preparation, the barrier material itself, foundations, fabrication, erection, and maintenance. Aesthetics should be judged with the involvement of personnel with diverse backgrounds, and public participation should be encouraged. However, there are numerous factors that go into the final selection. Some factors that should be considered in wall selection are summarized in Table 9.1. The reasonableness of constructing a noise barrier can be judged from a cost-benefit analysis. For example, Minnesota uses the following procedure. The benefit is based on the summed insertion loss (noise reduction) for each residence in the first two rows

780

CHAPTER NINE TABLE 9.1 Factors to be Considered in Noise Wall Selection Site Site geometry Right-of-way width Relation to source height Configuration, single or parallel Noise source Traffic type and volume Noise frequencies Extraneous noise sources Material Structural integrity Durability and maintenance Susceptibility to vandalism Acoustical properties Cost Site preparation Wall material Foundations Fabrication Erection Maintenance Aesthetics Scale relationship Environmental relationship Line form Color Texture Community preferences

of homes nearest the noise wall where the insertion loss is greater than 5 dBA. The ratio of this sum in dBA to the cost of the barrier in thousands of dollars must be greater than 0.4 for the benefit to be considered reasonable.

9.5 AESTHETICS Often, a detailed study is required to address the question of aesthetics. Alternative systems can be compared, with sketches, renderings, plan drawings, and other visual aids prepared to assist in the process. A multidiscipline team approach is desirable, including design engineers, planners, landscape architects, and environmental personnel. Public input to the selection system helps achieve acceptance of the final system. Designers should be concerned with the visual impact from both the driver’s side and the land user’s side of the wall. Some of the important aspects of aesthetics include scale relationship, relationship to environmental setting, line form, color, and texture. A high barrier alongside a row of single-story houses is not desirable, nor is one placed so close to the residences that unwanted shadows are created. A rule of thumb is to locate the barrier at a distance of

NOISE BARRIERS

781

atleast 4 times its height from the residences. Barriers higher than 16 ft (5 m) should be critically evaluated for potential unsightly impact. Evergreens and other plantings are often used with noise barriers to enhance appearance. Vines, encouraged to grow up the posts and across the top, have been appreciated by the public. Most agree that walls with extensive landscaping are the most visually appealing. When the elevation changes along the length of the wall, it is generally considered more pleasing to step the wall rather than to taper it. Ordinarily, the wall will be constructed vertically. There has been some use of walls that have the top tilted away from the roadway in an effort to reduce echo, but such walls tend to give the appearance of instability when viewed from the back side. On concrete panel walls, etc., it is necessary to place steel brackets or similar devices at the top of the joints between panels to hold the panels in alignment. A slight horizontal difference of 1 or 2 in (25 or 50 mm) between the tops of adjacent panels may give the illusion that some panels are in distress. This illusion is greatly enhanced by sun shadow lines that, under certain conditions, cast increasing shadows as one looks along the panels. For walls already in place, maintenance forces can tilt panels back in place with a backhoe or similar equipment and add the brackets. If a barrier is located in an area with dominant architectural features, this should be considered in the selection of barrier material, texture, and color. On the other hand, if located near dominant roadside features such as bridges, there should be an effort to create a strong visual relationship to such features. In most cases, there should be some consistency in color and surface treatment. For example, some agencies use color scheme and architectural treatment to distinguish between particular corridors. In general, barriers with darker colors are preferred to lighter ones because they tend to blend better with the background. Although it is usually desirable to avoid visual dominance, murals painted on noise barriers have been well received in some urban regions. The murals tend to discourage graffiti, and in some cases, youth groups have been active in restoring murals defaced by graffiti. With concrete barriers, a textured appearance can give the effect of shadows and is often considered desirable. Deep textures are more effective than shallow ones. Such treatments can be achieved by a raking technique on the surface of the newly placed concrete. Colors can be obtained with additions to the mix, or by applying a pigmented sealer after the barrier is constructed. The latter technique helps take care of small color variations between panels and minor field problems. Also, coatings can aid in removing graffiti and restoring the intended surface. For a pleasing visual effect, as well as for safety and acoustic considerations, barriers should not begin or end abruptly. To achieve this, they may be stepped down, flared, or tied into an earth berm, a hillside, a bridge abutment, or another feature. Tapering or stepping is particularly desirable where the height of the barrier exceeds 6 ft (1.8 mm). Views of several noise walls are shown in Figs. 9.2 through 9.5 to illustrate some of the effects that can be achieved. Figure 9.2 shows concrete-block construction and deep texturing with vertical grooves. The wall is stepped rather than tapered in height. Figure 9.3 shows timber tongue-in-groove construction, with a natural finish and a stepped height. In Fig. 9.4, the alignment of the timber barrier has been changed to a buttress configuration, and extensive plantings have been added. A much different effect has been obtained with concrete post construction, in Fig. 9.5, where the light posts make a distinct contrast with the darker timber. Making use of variant sun shadow lines on tops of concrete posts yields a changing view of the posts and wall as the sun direction changes during the day. Morning and afternoon shadow lines are greater and thus tend to make aesthetically pleasing wall tops. Also, early morning and late evening sun glare is reduced by north-south noise walls.

782

CHAPTER NINE

FIGURE 9.2

Concrete-block noise barrier with vertical groove treatment, stepped in height.

FIGURE 9.3

Timber noise barrier with tongue-in-groove construction, stepped in height.

NOISE BARRIERS

FIGURE 9.4

Timber noise barrier with buttress-type alignment.

FIGURE 9.5

Timber noise barrier with concrete posts showing effect of contrasting hues.

783

784

CHAPTER NINE

9.6 SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS Care must be taken not to install a noise barrier in such a way that it will be a safety hazard. The general considerations presented in Chap. 6, Safety Systems, apply here. Noise barrier design should incorporate all of the safety design techniques used in the basic roadway design. Examples of features that should be considered include transverse location to provide required clear zone, slopes of berms, sight distances, wall ends, plantings, and transitions. Ideally, noise barriers should be located beyond the clear zone. If not, a traffic barrier may be warranted. It is usually best to design the traffic barrier as part of the noise barrier. If a wall is located at or near the edge of the shoulder, the portion of the wall above the traffic barrier should be capable of withstanding the force of an occasional vehicle that may ride up above the top of the barrier. Concrete or masonry construction would often be used in this case. However, laminated wood construction may also be used. At locations such as ramps, intersections, and merge areas, care must be taken to avoid blocking the line of sight between vehicles. The AASHTO Guide on Evaluation and Abatement of Traffic Noise gives the following suggestions for placement of noise barriers: For on and off ramps, the minimum set back of a noise barrier is based upon the stopping sight distance, which is a function of the design speed and radius of curvature of the ramp. For ramp intersections, proper barrier location is set by the sight distance corresponding to the time required for a stopped vehicle to execute a left-turn maneuver (approximately 7.5 s). For intersecting roadways, barrier placement is determined from stopping sight distance, which depends on driver reaction time and deceleration rate.

The AASHTO Guide Specifications for Structural Design of Sound Barriers indicate that, when locating a sound barrier near a gore area, the wall should begin or end at least 200 ft (60 m) from the theoretical curb nose location. Protrusions that could constitute a hazard must be avoided near traffic lanes, as well as facings that could become missiles in the event of a crash. Also, surfaces must not create excessive glare. Sometimes it is necessary to store plowed snow between the roadway and the barriers over a width of 6 to 10 ft (1.8 to 3.0 m). In such cases, it should be removed as soon as practical to avoid blowing on the roadway and freezing. Also, there has been some occasional damage to wall panels from the pressure created by snowplows, and this should be avoided as well. Aside from snow storage, highway engineers should consider the potential for roadway icing problems resulting from deep shadows cast by walls. The end of a noise barrier or earth berm can be a hazard to approaching traffic. When exposed to approaching traffic within the clear zone area, it should be treated with protection similar to that for other fixed objects. Barrier rails or crash cushions may be appropriate. End slopes for earth berms should be 6:1 or flatter, with 10:1 or 15:1 desirable.

9.7 MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS It is wise to keep a stock of compatible replacement materials on hand to repair damage from impact or vandalism. Consideration should be given to keeping replacement

NOISE BARRIERS

785

materials where they can weather to match installed barriers, such as for pressure-treated timber components. Also, if color is added to concrete panels during manufacture, it is desirable to make future replacement panels in the same operation. The control of graffiti remains a problem in some urban areas. There are some antigraffiti surface treatments available, but they are generally costly. Power washing and repainting are current options. Plantings should be tolerant of roadside environments and require little or no maintenance. Access must be provided to both sides of the barrier for mowing, general maintenance, etc. Sometimes this may require backside access from city streets, or overlap openings along the length of the barrier. In some cases, arrangements can be made with abutting property owners to maintain the area behind the barrier. If the noise barrier is over 5 ft (1.5 m) high, the right-of-way fence can usually be eliminated. Some block masonry noise walls and retaining wall combinations made of 2000- to 3000-lb/in2 (14- to 21-MPa) dry cast units have exhibited extensive disintegration after 3 to 5 years. This disintegration is caused by salt spray from winter driving traffic during removal of snow and ice from the roadways. Testing of blocks removed from barriers showed similar disintegration and chloride ion content on the front and back or fill side. Application of treatments to seal only the front or exposed surfaces will not be effective for the back surfaces. Sealing the surfaces must be repeated and becomes a costly maintenance item. Work is underway to evaluate highstrength (5000-lb/in2) (35 MPa) dry cast blocks that should reduce susceptibility to chloride contaminants.

9.8 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STEPS Table 9.2 outlines the major steps required in the development of final construction plans for a noise abatement project on an existing highway. Considerations in several of these steps are as follows.

TABLE 9.2 Project Development Steps for Noise Barriers for Existing Highways 1. Preliminary engineering a. Identify project limits b. Collect data c. Identify alternatives 2. Public and municipal involvement a. Discuss alternatives b. Decide on system 3. Preparation of preliminary plans 4. Preliminary approvals a. Municipal b. State DOT c. FHWA 5. Final design 6. Final approval and processing 7. Contract letting

786

Preliminary Engineering. actions should take place: ● ●

● ● ● ● ● ●

CHAPTER NINE

During the preliminary engineering step, the following

Develop a basic noise abatement plan, and determine barrier height and location. Develop alternative methods of abatement such as walls, earth berms, berm-wall combinations, etc. Develop alternative locations for abatement facilities. Develop alternative material types such as concrete, timber, masonry, or steel. Develop a conceptual landscaping plan for each alternative. Develop cost estimates for alternatives. Develop a general environmental plan. Make preliminary arrangements for public informational meetings.

Items to be considered in selecting proposed alternatives include aesthetics, traffic safety, sight distance, drainage, maintenance, existing utilities, lighting, signing, potential soil problems, compatibility with surrounding terrain and land use, and restrictions imposed by available right-of-way. Consider any requirements for snow storage, future construction of sidewalks, trails, etc. Layouts, cross-sections, and wall profiles should be prepared for each alternative. Aerial photography contour maps should provide sufficient accuracy for determining ground elevations. Supplementary field information may be required in problem areas. Drainage away from both sides of the noise barrier should be provided, with a minimum slope of 0.04. Ditches or culverts may be required where walls or berms alter natural drainage patterns. Public and Municipal Involvement. Local officials and the affected public should be informed of the scope of the proposed work and the alternative methods being considered to achieve noise abatement. Work through these groups to achieve a consensus. Provide sketches, renderings, plan drawings, and other visual aids to assist in the process. With this input, a public corridor plan should be developed with a consistent theme that considers aesthetics and avoids conflicts with adjacent barriers. Preparation of Preliminary Plans. Preliminary plans must be prepared for design and safety review. The plans should include a layout with the wall placement and profiles of the ground line and the top of the barrier. Supplemental layouts for sight distance requirements may be required. Preliminary Approvals. Local approval of the preliminary plan developed is sought at this time. Where applicable, municipal acceptance of maintenance responsibility of back slopes or other areas outside the noise barrier should be obtained. Subsequent approval by the state DOT and FHWA is then sought. Final Design. Information on soil conditions at the final noise barrier location should be obtained from the soils engineer. The required depth of the investigation should correspond to the depth of post embedment or depth of spread footings. For construction in new embankment areas, care must be taken to avoid excessive differential settlement, because of concern for wall tilting, rotation, or cracking (of rigid systems). If a combination wall and berm is to be constructed, consider specifying an embankment material that will result in an economical wall design. It may be desirable to use a cohesive material of uniform thickness that does not move when saturated with water for the upper portion of the berm.

NOISE BARRIERS

787

Wall alignment can be modified slightly when necessary to make adjustments for standard panel sizes or material sizes; to fit with existing features such as trees, signs, lights, or utilities; or to better meet safety or drainage requirements. Often, wall designs are based on standard agency plans. Special designs may be required where a wall ties into a bridge abutment or retaining wall, where the wall height exceeds the standards, where lights or signs are constructed integrally with the wall, where the wall must also serve as a retaining wall, or where soil properties are outside the range of those anticipated in the design standards. State and local government agencies sometimes mandate that noise wall corridors be developed. As part of roadway improvement, they anticipate a need by local residents that will help approve the roadway system.

9.9 STRUCTURAL DESIGN 9.9.1 Noise Barrier Design Loads Wind Loads. In most cases, the wind load represents the main load. The design pressure depends upon the wind velocity, which should be based upon a 50-year mean recurrence interval (Fig. 9.6). The wind pressure is applied perpendicular to the wall surface to develop the design wind load. On the basis of AASHTO Guide Specifications for Structural Design of Sound Barriers, the pressure may be calculated from U.S. Customary units: SI units:

P 0.00256(1.3V) 2 CdCc

(9.1a)

P 0.613(1.3V) 2 CdCc

(9.1b)

where P wind pressure, lb/ft2 (N/m2) V wind velocity, mi/h (m/s) Cd drag coefficient 1.2 for noise walls Cc combined height, exposure, and location coefficient The factor of 1.3 in Eq. (9.1) provides for wind gusts. Values of Cc and calculated wind pressures are given in Table 9.3 A and B. The following four conditions with increasing levels of wind pressure are included: 1. Noise barriers not located on structures and having exposure B1. This includes urban and suburban areas with numerous closely spaced obstructions having the size of single-family dwellings or larger that prevail in the upwind direction from the noise wall for a distance of at least 1500 ft (457 m). 2. Noise barriers not located on structures and having exposure B2. This includes urban areas with more open terrain that does not meet exposure B1. 3. Noise barriers located on bridge structures, retaining walls, or traffic barriers (exposure C). This is based on open terrain with scattered obstructions. 4. Noise barriers not located on structures and having exposure D. This includes coastal regions. The interpretation of the surrounding terrain and identification of local conditions that may have increased effect on wind loads are left to the design engineer.

788

FIGURE 9.6 Wind velocities (mi/h) based on annual extreme-mile, 30 ft (9 m) above ground, 50-year mean recurrence interval. (From Guide Specifications for Structural Design of Sound Barriers, AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 1989, with permission)

789

NOISE BARRIERS TABLE 9.3A

Design Wind Pressures on Noise Walls Pressure for indicated wind velocity, lb/ft2

Location/ exposure Ground/B1

Ground/B2

Structure†/C

Coastal/D

Height,* ft

Coefficient Cc

70 mi/h

80 mi/h

90 mi/h

100 mi/h

110 mi/h

14 14–29 29 14 14–29 29 14 14–29 29 14 14–29 29

0.37 0.50 0.59 0.59 0.57 0.85 0.80 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.37 1.49

9 13 15 15 19 22 20 25 28 31 35 38

12 17 20 20 25 28 27 33 37 40 46 50

16 21 25 25 32 36 34 42 46 50 58 63

19 26 31 31 39 44 42 52 57 62 71 77

23 31 37 37 37 53 50 63 69 75 87 94

*Height refers to distance from average level of adjoining ground surface to centroid of loaded area in each height zone. †Structure refers to noise walls on bridge structures, retaining walls, or traffic barriers. Source: Adapted from AASHTO Guide Specifications for Structural Design of Sound Barriers, 1989, and Interim Specifications, 1992 and 2002, Washington, D.C.

TABLE 9.3B

Design Pressures on Noise Barriers Pressure for Indicated wind velocity, N/m2

Location/ exposure Ground/B1

Ground/B2

Structure†/C

Coastal/D

Height,* m

Coefficient Cc

30 m/s

35 m/s

40 m/s

45 m/s

50 m/s

4.3 4.3–8.8 8.8 4.3 4.3–8.8 8.8 4.3 4.3–8.8 8.8 4.3 4.3–8.8 8.8

0.37 0.50 0.59 0.59 0.57 0.85 0.80 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.37 1.49

414 559 660 660 638 951 895 1119 1231 1343 1533 1667

563 761 898 898 868 1294 1218 1523 1675 1827 2086 2269

736 995 1174 1174 1134 1691 1591 1989 2188 2387 2725 2964

931 1259 1485 1485 1435 2140 2014 2517 2769 3021 3449 3751

1150 1554 1834 1834 1772 2642 2486 3108 3419 3729 4258 4631

*Height refers to distance from average level of adjoining ground surface to centroid of loaded area in each height zone. †Structure refers to noise walls on bridge structures, retaining walls, or traffic barriers. Source: Adapted from AASHTO Guide Specifications for Structural Design of Sound Barriers, 1989, and Interim Specifications, 1992 and 2002, Washington, D.C.

790

CHAPTER NINE

Seismic Loads. AASHTO requires that, where structures are designed for seismic load, noise walls also be designed for such. They define the seismic load (EQD) as EQD A f D

(9.2)

where A acceleration coefficient (varies from 0.05 to 0.40 depending on geographical location; see AASHTO Guide Specifications, Fig. 1-2.1.3) D dead load f dead load coefficient (2.50, on bridges; 0.75, not on bridges; 8.0, connections of prefabricated walls to bridges; 5.0, connections of prefabricated walls to retaining walls) The product of A and f must not be taken as less than 0.10. Other Loads. In addition to dead load, other loads that might be encountered include earth load, live load surcharge, and ice and snow load. When encountered, these loads can be developed from information in the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. Increased allowable stress levels may be used for certain combinations, as discussed below. 9.9.2 Load Combinations Noise barriers can be designed by working-stress design methods or load factor design. For the working-stress design method, the following load combinations should be considered: Group I: D E SC Group II: D W E SC Group III: D QD E Group IV: D W E I where

D E SC W EQD I

dead load lateral earth pressure live load surcharge wind load seismic load ice and snow load

For load combination I, the stresses are limited to 100 percent of the basic allowable stresses. For load combinations II, III, and IV, the stresses are limited to 133 percent. 9.9.3 Design Criteria The AASHTO Guide Specifications state that, for the design of noise barriers in concrete, timber, or steel, the design should conform to either the AASHTO Bridge Specifications or an industry-recognized design specification. Such sources may be referred to for allowable stress values and other details. For masonry walls, detailed design criteria are presented in the AASHTO Guide Specifications. Other materials can be designed using established engineering principles and appropriate industry specifications.

791

NOISE BARRIERS

9.10 FOUNDATION DESIGN The capacity of the foundation soil should be determined using accepted engineering principles and measurement of material parameters such as cohesion and angle of friction, or on the basis of field data such as the standard penetration test or the shear vane test. (See Chap. 8 for pertinent information.) One agency uses the following for default values: 1. Use angle of friction 30° for granular soils and a cohesion value of c 1000 lb/ft2 (48 kPa) for plastic soils to determine post embedment. Water encountered in soils above embedment depths will require special designs. 2. Use 2000 lb/ft2 (96 kPa) for allowable bearing capacity unless higher values are approved by the soils engineer. 3. A maximum of 2 ft (600 mm) of unbalanced fill on one side of the noise wall will be allowed. Good compaction must be achieved on the low side of the wall prior to placing unbalanced fill. The AASHTO Guide Specifications recommend the following safety factors for the design of spread footings that support noise walls: Group

Overturning

Sliding

I II III IV

2.0 1.5 1.5 1.5

1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2

For walls supported on two or more rows of piles, the design should follow procedures in Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2004). For walls supported on a single row of piles, the pile must be designed as a column, considering both axial loads and bending. Also, the pile must be designed for the shear from the lateral loads. For panel-and-post type walls, the embedment depth of the post can be determined using Rankine or Coulomb earth pressure theories. The following equation follows from static equilibrium analysis and applies for a pile or post on level ground: Rd3 2Pd P2 0 Ph 12 3 3Rd

(9.3)

where P applied ultimate lateral load, lb (N) h vertical distance from lateral load to top of embedment, ft (mm) (disregard upper 6 in (150 mm) of soil at ground surface) R net horizontal ultimate lateral soil pressure limit, lb/ft2 (Pa) per ft (mm) of depth d required depth of embedment, ft (mm) Note that both P and R are ultimate values. The design load must be increased by an appropriate load factor, and the resisting soil pressure decreased by an appropriate load factor. Example—U.S. Customary units. P 200 lb, h 6 ft, and R 600 (lb/ft2)/ft. Determine d. By trial and error, it is found that d 3.2 ft satisfies Eq. (9.3). The final trial gives 600(3.2)3 2(200)(3.2) 2002 0 200(6) 12 3 3(600)(3.2)

792

CHAPTER NINE

0 1638 427 7 1200 0 ≈4

(close enough; OK)

The post should be embedded a distance of 3.2 0.5 3.7 ft below the ground surface. The maximum moment in the pile or post can be expected to occur at a depth of 0.25d. In this case, the maximum moment is M P(h 0.25d) 200(6 0.25 3.2) 1360 ft lb Example—SI units. P 890 N, h 1830 mm, and R 0.0287 Pa. Determine d. By trial and error, it is found that d 975 mm satisfies Eq. (9.3). The final trial gives 0

0.0287(975)3 2(890)(975) (890)2 − 890(1830) − − 12 3 3(0.0287)(975)

0 2, 216, 739 − 578, 500 − 9, 436 − 1, 628, 700 0 ≈ 103

(close enough; OK )

9.11 CONSTRUCTION The following material is presented in the format of a typical specification used by one agency for the construction of noise barriers (noise walls). In addition to the type of wall included—timber wall with concrete posts—it can be adapted to walls of other types.

A. Miscellaneous Structure Removal Abandoned structures and other obstructions shall be removed from the right-of-way and disposed of in accordance with DOT provisions except as modified below: All debris resulting from the removal items and all other materials that become the property of the contractor and are not recycled into the project shall be disposed of outside the right-of-way in accordance with DOT provisions. This work shall be incidental to removal and salvage operations, and no direct compensation will be made therefor. The contractor’s attention is directed to possible privately owned appurtenances adjacent to the construction site that may need to be removed. If the private appurtenances are damaged, the contractor will be required to reinstate the appurtenances to satisfaction of owner. This work shall be considered incidental to the removal operations, and no direct compensation will be made therefor.

NOISE BARRIERS

793

B. Clearing and Grubbing at Construction Site The engineer shall have authority to limit the surface area of erodible earth material exposed by clearing and grubbing, excavation, and borrow and fill operations and to direct the contractor to provide immediate permanent or temporary control measures to prevent contamination of adjacent streams and other watercourses, lakes, ponds, and areas of water impoundment. Cut slopes shall be seeded and mulched as the excavation proceeds to the extent considered desirable and practicable. The contractor will be required to incorporate all permanent erosion control features into the project at the earliest practicable time as outlined in his/her accepted schedules. Temporary pollution control measures will be used when needed to correct conditions that develop during construction but were not foreseen during the design stage, when needed prior to installation of permanent erosion control features, or when needed temporarily to control erosion that develops during normal construction practices; by definition, such temporary measures are not associated with the permanent control features on the project. Where erosion is likely to be a problem, clearing and grubbing operations should be so scheduled and performed that grading operations and permanent erosion control features can follow immediately thereafter if the project conditions permit; otherwise, temporary erosion control measures may be required between successive construction stages. Under no conditions shall the surface area of erodible earth material exposed at one time by clearing and grubbing exceed 750,000 ft2 (70,000 m2) without approval of the engineer.

C. Furnishing Concrete Post and Wood Noise Wall This work shall consist of furnishing all materials for and constructing wood noise attenuator walls complete with concrete posts, and wood retaining wall, all in accordance with the plan details, the applicable DOT Standard Specifications, the required specifications for pigmented sealer and exterior wood surface stain, and the following: 1. General. All thickness and width dimensions of solid sawn wood for timber facing material indicated in the plans for wood wall construction shall be construed to be nominal dimensions unless otherwise indicated in the plans or these special provisions. 2. Materials a. Concrete Posts. Concrete posts shall be constructed as detailed in the plan and the required specification on pigmented sealer. b. Wood Noise Walls. The facing lumber and battens shall be any species of southern pine conforming to the applicable provisions of DOT, modified to the extent that the lumber shall contain no holes and have tight knots. No intermixing of lumber species will be permitted within any continuous section of wall. If the wall abuts any earth fill greater than 2 ft (600 mm), the facing planks installed below the top of the fill shall be 8- 3-in (200- 75-mm) or 6- 3-in (150- 75-mm) lumber with the 3-in (75-mm) dimension being rough-sawn. All facing lumber and battens shall be pressure preservative–treated with an approved waterborne preservative as provided hereinafter. Lumber treated with Millbrite will not be acceptable. Facing boards shall be surfaced on two sides, and shall be tongue-and-grooved. All plank facing lumber shall be no. 1 structural grade or better. Facing lumber and battens shall be stamped with the appropriate grade mark. c. Hardware. All hardware for noise wall shall be galvanized and meet the requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and ASTM as to strength and testing.

794

CHAPTER NINE

D. Preservative Treatment All lumber shall be pressure-treated with a preservative in accordance with the provisions of AASHTO M133 and the American Wood Protection Association (AWPA) manual. 1. All wall facings and battens shall be treated with a pressure preservative as approved by AWPA. 2. Wood materials shall be treated as required for aboveground installation, or for installation in contact with ground or water, in accordance with the applicable provisions of AASHTO M133 with a retention level of 0.60 lb/ft3 (9.6 kg/m3). 3. All southern pine materials shall be free of sap stain (blue stain). 4. All wood members shall be kiln-dried to a moisture content of 15 percent or less after preservative treatment. 5. After completion of the preservative treatment, all lumber materials shall be protected from any increase in moisture content by covering or any other approved method until incorporated into the wall. 6. The same preservative treatment shall be used to treat bolt holes, saw cuts, etc., if any, and for any additional dressing deemed necessary by the engineer. 7. All treated wood members shall be cared for in accordance with the applicable provisions of AWPA Standard for the Care of Preservative Treated Wood Products.

E. Construction Requirements 1. Construction of wood noise attenuator walls, together with appurtenant posts, etc., shall be accomplished in accordance with the plan details, the applicable DOT Standard Specifications, these special provisions, or as otherwise approved by the engineer. 2. Nailing and fastening shall be accomplished in a manner that will avoid splitting boards. A 4-mil (0.10-mm) polyethylene sheeting may be placed between the planks and the earth for added protection when fill is being retained. 3. Joints shall be constructed in a manner that will completely arrest the passage of light. No daylight shall be visible through the joints 120 days after completion of the wall. The contractor is advised to take whatever measures are necessary to avoid excessive shrinkage or shifting that would cause the passage of light. Where passage of light does occur, the contractor shall take corrective action, in the form of caulking, or other means to the satisfaction of the engineer, at his/her own expense. 4. Storage of materials within the right-of-way will be permitted only as approved by the engineer. 5. Debris shall be disposed of outside the right-of-way as specified by the engineer. Posts shall be plumb after installation. 6. The trench and trench backfill shall be compacted by the ordinary compaction method. The trench bottom shall be compacted to 90 percent of maximum density, and the bedding to 95 percent and 90 percent on each side of the footing. The density control shall not apply to the topsoil. The layers of material to be compacted shall be placed and compacted simultaneously so that the backfill material will be raised uniformly throughout the entire embedment depth.

NOISE BARRIERS

795

F. Noise Wall Measurement and Payment 1. Concrete posts of each size will be measured separately by the length of the posts furnished and installed complete in place as specified. Payment will be made at the contract bid price per linear foot, which shall be compensation in full for all costs relative thereto. 2. Noise wall construction will be measured by the total front face area of the wall constructed (i.e., the area between the centers of end posts, and between the top of the wall and 6 in (150 mm) below the tabulated ground line). 3. Payment will be made for noise attenuator wall at the contract bid price per square foot, which price shall be compensation in full for all costs of constructing the wall complete in place as specified, except the appurtenant concrete posts, which shall be compensated for separately under the appropriate contract item provided. 4. Instead of the hand-driven “full-head” nail as shown in the plan, a reduced-head power-driven nail may be used to meet one of the following modifications: a. Use a nail one gauge heavier. b. Increase the number of nails used in each pattern by a minimum of 50 percent. For example, use 3 nails instead of 2, 5 instead of 3, 2 instead of 1. 5. In case of failure on the part of the contractor to control erosion, pollution, and siltation as ordered, the DOT reserves the right to employ outside assistance or to use its own forces to provide the necessary corrective measures. All expenses so incurred by the department, including its engineering costs, that are chargeable to the contractor as his/her obligation and expense, will be deducted from any monies due or coming due the contractor.

CHAPTER 10

VALUE ENGINEERING AND LIFE CYCLE COST Harold G. Tufty, CVS, FSAVE Editor and Publisher Value Engineering and Management Digest Washington, D.C.

Value engineering (VE) may be defined as a systematic method for identifying the function of a product or service, establishing its worth, and generating alternatives to provide the required function at the least life cycle cost. A discipline that evolved out of the necessity for finding alternative materials for manufacturing during the 1940s, it was originally applied to projects in the Department of Defense and in industry. First adopted for highways in California and Florida in the early 1970s, it has been used with increasing success for highway projects nationwide. Virginia’s pioneering VE legislation in 1990 set a standard that resulted in a savings of over $565,000,000 over the next 17 years. The impetus for using VE increased in 1995 when Congress passed the National Highway System (NHS) Designation Act, which included a provision requiring the Secretary of Transportation to establish a program that would require states to carry out a VE analysis for federal-aid projects of $25,000,000 or more. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) subsequently published its regulation (23 CFR Part 627) establishing the program on February 14, 1997. Life cycle costing, or least-cost analysis, is an integral part of VE. It provides a rational means of comparing the costs of alternatives in terms of today’s dollars, including the effects of initial cost, maintenance cost, and rehabilitation cost. This chapter reviews the policies of the Federal Highway Administration on VE, and guidelines offered by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). It also explains the fundamentals of the process, provides detail on implementation methods, and cites examples of successful VE programs.

10.1 FHWA ROLE IN VALUE ENGINEERING The FHWA’s VE program applies to the federal-aid program under which authorized funds are distributed to states for state Department of Transportation (DOT) projects. According to the FHWA, the program is designed to (1) encourage state DOTs to use VE, 797

798 TABLE 10.1

CHAPTER TEN Summary of Savings in Federal-Aid Highway Programs, Fiscal Years 2003–2007

Number of studies Cost of studies including administration, $ millions Estimated construction cost, $ billions Number of recommendations Value of recommendations, $ billions Number of approved recommendations Value of approved recommendations, $ billions Return on investment

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

316 $12.54

251 $8.15

300 $9.80

324 $7.67

309 $8.42

$24.81 2861 $4.60 1233 $1.97

$21.53 1924 $3.06 996 $1.785

$31.58 2427 $6.76 1077 $3.187

$18.7 1794 $3.04 793 $1.115

$20.48 1909 $1.97 794 $1.110

157:1

219:1

325:1

145:1

132:1

(2) ensure that National Highway System projects required by law and regulation (currently greater than $25,000,000 for federal-aid highway projects or $20,000,000 for bridges) receive VE reviews, (3) encompass a variety of VE activities focused on education and training, technical assistance, liaison with industry and states, promotional activities, and active participation in studies, and (4) focus on training federal, state, and local highway employees through the National Highway Institute’s VE workshop. Table 10.1 summarizes past VE savings in the federal-aid program over a 4-year period as reported by the FHWA. Savings in 2007 on highway programs totaled nearly $2,000,000,000. In addition to these savings, other federal departments generated significant VE savings. Articles 10.1.1 through 10.1.4 are based on information excerpted from the website www.fhwa.dot.gov/ve. Further information is available in the FHWA text, “Value Engineering for Highways,” available in each state DOT or FHWA office or from the FHWA VE coordinator. 10.1.1 Goals and Objectives The FHWA states the following regarding VE goals and objectives: The goal of a VE study is to achieve design excellence. Its objectives are to improve quality, minimize total ownership costs, reduce construction time, make the project easier to construct, insure safe operations, and assure environmental and ecological goals. The VE team is looking for the optimum blend of scheduling, performance, constructability, maintainability, environmental awareness, safety, and cost consciousness. The VE process is not meant to criticize today’s designs or insinuate that the regular highway design process is not providing acceptable designs. This is not the case. The designs being prepared today are good designs, they can be built, and they will function as intended. Highway designers do not deliberately design poor value into a project; yet, it happens.

10.1.2 Reasons for Poor Quality Reasons cited for poor quality in some highway designs are as follows: Lack of information ● Failure to get sufficient facts before starting. ● Lack of knowledge or misunderstanding of the full requirements of the original project plan. ● Decisions based on “educated guesses.”

VALUE ENGINEERING AND LIFE CYCLE COST

799

Wrong beliefs ● Erroneous interpretations or conclusions of the facts. ● Unfortunate experiences with past applications of materials, etc. ● Bias against proven technology. Habitual thinking ● Doing things “the same way we’ve always done them.” ● Tendency to reuse what worked the last time. ● Copying standards of other agencies. ● Lack of attention to the current state-of-the-art. Risk of personal loss ● Anything done over and over again minimizes risk through trial and error. ● Risk associated with trying something that you have not tried before. ● Decisions based on “nearly related” data, rather than the actual case. Reluctance to ask for advice ● Designers are often very reluctant to seek advice from others in their field. ● Failure of designers to admit that they might not know all the answers. Time pressures ● Need to provide a project design as quickly as humanly possible, sometimes even quicker. ● Pressure becomes so great that anything with a reasonable chance of working is designed into the project. ● Acceptance of the first workable solution in order to complete the design on time. ● No time to sit and contemplate. ● No time to sit and think up alternative approaches. Negative attitudes ● Some people are reluctant to consider a change of any type regardless of its merit. ● Most designers feel they always provide the best, the first time, regardless of how much time they spend developing the design. Rapidly changing technology ● Rapid strides taking place in the development of processes, products, and materials. ● Technology is constantly changing. ● No one person can be expected to be completely current in any field. Strict adherence to “requirements” ● Requirements are often unrelated to required performance, materials, safety, or procedures. ● Assumed requirement when not specifically specified. ● Concentration on the development of a reliable system that exceeds all known and assumed requirements. ● Each unnecessary requirement that is met in a design costs money, but worse still, increases the chance of failure of the overall system. Poor human relations ● Poor communications. ● Misunderstandings. ● Jealousy. ● Normal friction between human beings.

800

CHAPTER TEN

10.1.3 Steps in VE Review Process The VE review process uses a team of individuals representing different disciplines who do not have a vested interest in the project. The teams break down a project into its basic functions and then use creativity to find different ways to perform these functions. The teams provide management with as many recommendations as practicable. The recommendations are then evaluated by staff offices in specialty areas that may be impacted. Management must then decide, based on all available information, whether or not to approve the recommendations. The following steps are used in every VE review: ● ● ● ● ● ●

Identify the major elements of a project. Analyze the functions these project elements perform. Use brainstorming to develop several design alternatives to perform those functions. Evaluate the alternatives to ensure they do not degrade the project. Assign costs (including life cycle costs) to each of the most promising alternatives. Develop the promising alternatives into acceptable recommendations.

10.1.4 FHWA VE Policy Guide The FHWA has developed the following federal-aid policy guide that provides much useful information for the application of VE: 1. PURPOSE. To provide policy guidance on the application of value engineering in the federal-aid highway program. 2. AUTHORITY. a. Section 106(e) of Title 23, United States Code provides: “For such projects as the Secretary determines advisable, plans, specifications, and estimates for proposed projects on any Federal-aid system shall be accompanied by a value engineering or other cost reduction analysis.” b. Section 106(g) of Title 23, United States Code provides: “The Secretary shall establish a program to require States to carry out a value engineering analysis for all projects on the National Highway System [NHS] with an estimated total cost of $25,000,000 or more.” The Federal Highway Administration published its regulation establishing this program on February 14, 1997. c. Paragraph 6b(2) of DOT Order 1395.1A, Use of Value Engineering in the Department of Transportation, dated May 8, 1992, provides: “Each DOT Operating Administration should strongly encourage the use of VE in its grant awards or Federally assisted programs for major transportation projects throughout the planning, design and/or construction phases. This may include the use of VE proposals as a result of VE studies/analyses as well as VE incentive clauses in construction contracts.” d. Paragraph 9 of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Value Engineering Circular A-131, dated May 21, 1993, provides: “Each agency shall report Fiscal Year results of using VE annually to OMB, except those agencies whose total budget is under $10 million or whose total procurement obligations do not exceed $10 million in a given fiscal year.” The Circular also describes what VE data must be submitted and the format for submitting the data to OMB.


801

3. DEFINITIONS. a. Life cycle cost: The total cost of an item’s ownership over its life cycle. This includes initial acquisition costs (right-of-way, planning, design, construction), operation, maintenance, modification, replacement, demolition, financing, taxes, disposal, and salvage value as applicable. b. Project: A portion of a highway that a state proposes to construct, reconstruct, or improve as described in the preliminary design report or applicable environmental document. A project may consist of several contracts or phases over several years. c. Product or service: Any element of a highway project from concept through maintenance and operation. In all instances, the required function should be achieved at the lowest life cycle cost consistent with requirements for performance, maintainability, safety, and aesthetics. d. Value engineering: The systematic application of recognized techniques by a multidisciplinary team to identify the function of a project or service, establish a worth for that function, generate alternatives through the use of creative thinking, and provide the needed functions to accomplish the original purpose of the project, reliably, and at the lowest life cycle cost without sacrificing safety, necessary quality, and environmental attributes of the project. e. Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) clause: A construction contract provision that encourages the contractor to propose changes in the contract requirements which will accomplish the project’s functional requirements at less cost or improve value or service at no increase or a minor increase in cost. The net savings of each proposal is usually shared with the contractor at a stated reasonable rate. 4. POLICY. The FHWA will ensure that a VE study is performed on all federal-aidfunded NHS projects with an estimated cost (includes design, right-of-way, and construction costs) of $25 million or more, and on other federal-aid projects where its employment has high potential for cost savings. In addition, FHWA will strongly encourage state departments of transportation to use VE throughout highway project development, design, and construction. 5. CHARACTERISTICS. To be considered VE, the analysis process should incorporate each of the following characteristics: a. A multidisciplinary team approach b. The systematic application of a recognized technique (VE job plan) c. The identification and evaluation of function, cost, and worth d. The use of creativity to speculate on alternatives that can provide the required functions (search for solutions from new and unusual sources) e. The evaluation of the best and lowest life cycle cost alternatives f. The development of acceptable alternatives into fully supported recommendations g. The presentation/formal reporting of all VE recommendations to management for review, approval, and implementation. 6. APPLICATION. a. A VE analysis shall be applied to all federal-aid-funded NHS projects with estimated costs of $25 million or more; however, VE should not be limited to only projects of this scope. It can also be highly effective when used on other projects when there is potential for a significant ratio of savings to the cost of the VE study or substantial improvements in project or program effectiveness. b. For maximum benefit, VE should be employed as early as possible in the project development/design process so valid VE recommendations can be implemented without delaying the progress of the project or causing significant

802

CHAPTER TEN

rework of completed designs. States should schedule VE routinely into the project development/design process. While all projects will not necessarily benefit from the application of VE, the review process should be set up to consider all projects and a VE analysis should be applied to those projects offering the greatest potential for improvement and/or savings. c. Recommendations from VE studies and VECPs should receive prompt reviews by state officials to determine their acceptability. States should also develop procedures for implementing accepted recommendations. 7. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. The FHWA’s text “Value Engineering for Highways” provides further details on the VE technique and its applicability to highway projects and functions. It has been widely distributed as a part of FHWA’s training effort and a copy should be available in each state DOT and FHWA office. Additional copies may be obtained from the FHWA VE coordinator. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guidelines for Value Engineering (AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2001) also provides an excellent description of VE. 8. FHWA RESPONSIBILITIES. a. Division office (1) Designate a VE coordinator and encourage state to host VE training provided by the FHWA, a qualified VE consultant, and/or develop its own VE training. (2) Encourage state to use VE by actively participating in VE studies and advising it that VE study costs are eligible (as preliminary engineering costs) for federal-aid participation. (3) Ensure all applicable NHS projects receive a VE analysis and encourage additional studies of other projects. (4) Ensure the state has an active VE program and encourage it to include a VECP clause in its construction contracts. (5) Summarize the state’s VE activity on all federal-aid projects annually and provide the information to the FHWA VE coordinator. b. FHWA VE coordinator (1) Promote VE and serve as the technical expert on VE matters for FHWA, state, and local highway agencies. (2) Provide VE briefings to FHWA, state, and local executives and upper management. (3) Provide VE training and technical expertise to FHWA, state, and local highway agencies. Assist states to develop VE programs. (4) Coordinate VE with other FHWA activities aimed at cost reduction or product improvement. (5) Compile VE activity data received from the division offices and prepare annual report for DOT. (6) Represent FHWA in VE forums with the U.S. DOT and other federal and state governmental agencies, including membership in SAVE International (formerly the Society of American Value Engineers). Serve as FHWA’s representative to the AASHTO VE Task Force. 9. STATE DOT RESPONSIBILITIES. a. Each state shall establish a continuing VE program that ensures all applicable NHS projects will receive a VE analysis and provides for the review, approval, implementation, and documentation of the VE study recommendations. Individuals knowledgeable in VE shall be assigned the responsibility to coordinate and monitor the program. States should also develop a VE training program, a tracking and/or record keeping system, and a process to disseminate


803

and publicize their VE results. This work may include the use of qualified VE specialists on a consulting basis. b. States should include a VECP clause in their construction contracts to encourage contractors to propose changes in contract requirements which will do the following: (1) Reduce project cost(s) or improve value or service at no increase or a minor increase in cost. (2) Provide states with innovative contractor ideas or techniques to be considered when preparing plans, specifications, and estimates on future projects. The net savings of each proposal should be shared with the contractor at a stated reasonable rate. Reimbursement for such share is eligible for pro rata reimbursement with federal-aid funds. States should retain the right to accept or reject all proposals and acquire all rights to use accepted VE proposals in current and future projects without restriction. An example VECP provision is contained in the AASHTO Guidelines for Value Engineering. 10. USE OF CONSULTANTS. States may employ qualified VE consultants to conduct VE studies on federal-aid projects or elements of federal-aid projects. Consulting firms should not apply VE to their own designs (the law prohibits persons involved in the project from being on the VE team). It is strongly recommended that consultants be qualified VE practitioners, be experienced in performing and leading VE studies (have participated in several VE studies as a team member and as a team leader), and have sufficient VE training, education, and experience to be recognized by SAVE International as meeting the requirements for certification. 11. REPORTING. a. All VE studies and VECP conducted on federal-aid projects shall be used to prepare an annual VE summary report. At the end of the fiscal year, each division office and/or state DOT will prepare the annual VE summary report and submit it to the FHWA VE coordinator. Reports are due by November 10 of each year. b. The FHWA VE coordinator shall prepare an annual report including an assessment of the effectiveness of efforts to encourage VE on federal-aid projects to the U.S. DOT by December 10 of each year.

10.2 AASHTO ROLE IN VALUE ENGINEERING To assist state DOTs in the application of VE, the AASHTO Task Force on Value Engineering, originally organized in 1985, has developed the publication, Guidelines for Value Engineering, already cited. Portions of the publication* are summarized in Arts. 10.2.1 through 10.2.6. The AASHTO value engineering technical committee maintains a useful website, www.wsdot.wa.gov/partners/AASHTOVE. Also, a VE engineering conference is sponsored every 2 years. AASHTO has taken the position that every member state should establish an ongoing VE program to improve design excellence and achieve cost and quality control. VE is seen as a means for addressing the problem of rising costs and diminishing resources through applications in many areas such as project development, construction, traffic operations, and maintenance.

*The portions of Art. 10.2 taken from this source are used with the permission of AASHTO.

804

CHAPTER TEN

10.2.1 Elements of a Successful VE Program AASHTO suggests the following as important elements of a successful VE program: ●

● ●

●

●

A firm commitment of resources and support by executive management is the most important element for ensuring the success of a VE program. All levels of management must understand and support VE. A state VE program requires the development of a policy directive describing where, when, how, and to what specific areas of work the VE effort should be directed. It is essential to provide some degree of VE training and program familiarization at every level within the state organization. For optimal results in the project development phase, VE should be performed as follows: Early in the planning-design process to maximize potential product improvement and cost savings. On high-cost and/or complex projects. By a multidisciplinary team of professionals trained in VE techniques.

●

A value engineering change proposal program to encourage contractors to develop construction VE proposals allows the state to benefit from a contractor’s design and construction ingenuity, experience, and ability to work through or around bureaucratic restrictions. Some important elements of a successful, ongoing VECP program are the following: Processing of proposals must be kept simple and done quickly. Cost savings are shared with the contractor. Change proposals become the property of the state, and the concept may be used on future projects. Change proposals should not compromise any essential design criteria or preliminary engineering commitments. Change proposals cannot be the basis for a contract claim. The state agency has the option to reject, with good justification, contractors’ proposals.

●

It is essential that all VE team recommendations and contractor proposals be fairly reviewed and expeditiously evaluated for implementation. VE techniques can also be used to improve productivity in other areas of a state’s transportation program, including traffic operations, maintenance processes, procedures and operations, standard plans and specifications, and design criteria and guidelines. VE programs within the state organization should be closely monitored, evaluated, and modified to ensure the program’s effectiveness.

●

●

It is also emphasized that understanding and support of VE by top management are the most important factors in a successful VE program. Such support is needed initially to ensure adequate funding for training of staff and establishment of the program. Once the VE program is established, the continuing active involvement of top management is needed to create and maintain positive attitudes. 10.2.2 Benefits of a VE Program The main benefit of a VE program is improvement of the benefit-to-cost ratio throughout state transportation programs. Other perceived benefits are as follows:

VALUE ENGINEERING AND LIFE CYCLE COST ●

●

●

● ●

●

●

●

805

Design, construction, and maintenance standards are constantly being reviewed through VE team activities. The structured, functional approach using a job plan (see Arts. 10.3 and 10.4) provides trained employees with a new method of approaching problems. VE team members develop an appreciation for the concerns and issues of other functional areas or disciplines, and communications are often improved. Team work skills and team dynamics are enhanced in the design process. Designers improve or develop their skills in preparing and delivering to management logical, organized presentations supporting their views. After gaining VE experience, many designers find it comparatively easy to apply the principles in the regular design process. Implementing a VECP program has a potential for improving state/contractor relations through more cooperative processing of change proposals. Proven VE designs or techniques and VECP-accepted changes often have applications for numerous future projects or contracts, thereby providing continuing savings and other benefits.

10.2.3 Training AASHTO recommends that orientation and training be provided at nearly every level within the organization, including team members, team leaders, and management. Executive management must understand and support the fundamentals and principles of VE for the program to be successful. VE administrators, team leaders, and team members need basic and subsequent training to ensure success of the VE process and the implementation of recommendations. An overview of the procedures and the benefits of VE should be provided to staff not directly involved to encourage understanding and support. Training in VE is available from various sources, including the National Highway Institute and consultants. A combination of VE theory and hands-on experience is desirable. SAVE International (formerly Society of American Value Engineers) offers several forms of VE certification. (See www.value-eng.com.) To become certified, one must meet all of the employment, VE performance standards, formal training, professional growth, and professional contribution requirements established by SAVE. The following certifications are available: ●

●

●

A value methodology practitioner. Individuals who are familiar with VE but whose primary occupation is not VE. An associate value specialist. Individuals familiar with VE, but who have not acquired enough points to become a certified value specialist. A certified value specialist (CVS). Individuals whose principal occupation is VE.

To become a CVS, one must attend a 40-h SAVE-certified Mod I VE workshop and a 24-h SAVE-certified Mod II VE workshop, have 50 percent or more of the job description relate to VE, perform a number of VE studies as a team member and as a team leader, write a paper on VE, and take a test. Normal time to become certified is 4 to 5 years. 10.2.4 Study Selection and Scheduling As previously indicated, states must perform a VE analysis on all federal-aid-funded projects on the National Highway System having an estimated total cost (design,

806

CHAPTER TEN

construction, right-of-way, and utilities) of $25 million or more. However, additional projects should be selected for study, based on providing the maximal opportunity to improve the public investment by quality enhancement or life cycle cost savings. AASHTO has identified the following typical characteristics of potential VE projects: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Projects substantially exceeding initial cost estimates Complex or multipart projects or processes providing unique, but costly functions Items using critical or high-cost materials Items requiring difficult construction or fabrication procedures Items performing a questionable function Items appearing too costly to build, operate, or maintain Projects that have grown complex, possibly by development over a long period of time Major structures Projects with complicated or costly traffic control or detours

For optimal results, VE should be applied as early as possible after basic design elements and preliminary cost information have been developed. This way, design recommendations can be more readily incorporated; the earlier VE is applied, the greater the potential for savings. With proper timing and planning, the VE administrator can ensure that specific VE studies are accomplished without conflicting with the project schedule. 10.2.5 Team Structure AASHTO gives the following guidance on structuring the VE team. A team of five to seven persons with diverse areas of expertise usually produces the best results. A team of fewer than five tends to limit the amount and variety of creative input, and a team of more than seven can be unwieldy. Teams should be structured so there is appropriate expertise to evaluate the major problem areas anticipated within the project, e.g., traffic, right-of-way, structures, soils, paving, etc. Including general expertise from the areas of design, construction, right-of-way, maintenance, or traffic operations makes for a good team balance. Team Leader. One individual should be appointed as team leader to guide the team in its efforts and be responsible for its actions during the study. The team leader should be an individual who is very knowledgeable of, and proficient in, the VE process and able to direct the team’s activities toward its goal. Additional training in motivation and leadership techniques may be warranted for team leaders. A VE consultant serving as team leader should be a certified value specialist with highway experience. Team Members. Representatives from disciplines other than engineering can provide greater objectivity to a team effort. Expertise from outside the state organization (e.g., local agency, citizen groups, United States Forestry Service (USFS), FHWA, consultants, etc.) may be appropriate on certain projects. Federal law prohibits individuals directly involved in the design of a project from being on the VE team analyzing the project; however, the original designer is an excellent resource individual for the team to consult. Specific training in the concepts, application, and techniques of VE is highly desirable for those working as VE team members. Occasionally, a team may include one or two members who are untrained in VE, but highly skilled in disciplines that are vital to the study.


807

10.2.6 Value Engineering Change Proposals As described by AASHTO, VECP programs differ from other VE programs in that the construction contractors develop the recommendations. The contractors choose whether or not to participate, with the incentive for sharing in any cost savings realized. Thus, the states must create and manage a program that will be attractive to the contractors. This program is called by different names in various states, for example, Value Engineering Incentive Provision (VEIP), Value Engineering Incentive Clause (VEIC), and CostReduction Incentive Proposal (CRIP). A contractor’s participation in a VECP program involves a certain amount of risk. It costs money to search for realistic savings that will be shared by the state, and the contractor cannot expect all proposals to be accepted. However, the program offers an opportunity for contractors to demonstrate ingenuity, innovation, and construction excellence, and to receive financial benefit. Care should be taken to ensure that a VECP does not compromise any essential design criteria or any preliminary engineering commitments such as environmental mitigation measures. Specific construction elements, such as bridge-span lengths or type of noise barriers, may be excluded from consideration for a VECP, but such exclusions will limit potential savings opportunities. Any exclusions should be delineated in the specifications or other contract documentation. Benefits. The VECP must not result in impairment of essential functions and characteristics of any part of the project including, but not limited to, service life, reliability, economy of operation, ease of maintenance, desired aesthetics, and safety. The VECP program offers benefits to the state when it (1) enhances the design at reduced cost to the state, (2) results in a net savings over the contract cost, or (3) advances the project completion date. The program offers a low-cost opportunity to use the experience and creative talents of the contractor. Contractors participating in the VECP program take pride in contributing actively to the final development and construction of the project. Contract Documents. To invite proposals from the contractors, the state should include in the contract document a VECP section, specifically defining basic requirements and evaluation criteria. Before initiating a VECP program, a state may want to secure an interpretation from the attorney general or other appropriate source as to the legality of their VECP provisions. VECP specifications and requirements are described in Section 104.07 of the latest version of AASHTO’s Guide Specifications for Highway Construction (visit the website www.aashto.org for information on how to obtain a copy). In an effort to promote a higher VECP participation, some states are studying the application of the VE job plan (see Arts. 10.3 and 10.4) in facilitated sessions with contractors that can include state employees. Review Process. The review process for a VECP should include the development of a review schedule to ensure the reviewing agency can meet the contractor’s time frame. VECPs occur during the construction phase of a project and time is usually short. A schedule must be developed for those offices and/or persons who must review and comment on the VECP before final disposition. There should be a single point of contact for each state, to ensure no required office or person is omitted from the review process. The single point of contact also can act to enforce the review schedule. All comments resulting from the review should be compiled and resolved, with a final accept/reject recommendation to management. Proper documentation is essential. Complete and accurate estimates are required for correct savings calculations. The final step in the review process is justification. This is not a trivial step. Timely, accurate notification of all parties involved may reduce confusion and litigation, which also can be avoided by adding language to the state’s VECP provision.

808

CHAPTER TEN

Securing Adequate Contractor Participation. The first step in securing adequate contractor participation is to be certain the VECP program encourages, rather than discourages, such participation. For instance, the sharing percentage must be equitable. The VECP requirements, policies, and procedures should not be so legalistic, stringent, or cumbersome as to discourage contractors from participating, and there should be flexibility to meet changing conditions. Past experience indicates contractors need to be oriented to the VECP program and educated about VE methodology and procedures. A state initiating a VECP program should do what is necessary to ensure an effective contractor orientation and education program is developed and conducted. Otherwise, many contractors probably will be reluctant to participate. AASHTO suggests the following approaches to contractor orientation and education: ●

●

●

The state should work closely with contractor organizations during the whole of the VECP program planning process. It is important to allow contractors the opportunity to review all elements of the program and provide input. The payoffs from this kind of a joint effort, in contractor support and participation, can be considerable. The state should encourage contractors to develop and conduct VE training courses. Where the state is conducting VE training for its own staff, contractor staff also could attend such programs. The contractor orientation, education, and promotion program should be a continuing one. Continuing efforts could include regular and periodic distribution of VE information and discussion of VE during preconstruction conferences.

Most of these approaches are obvious, and certainly many others could be developed to fit particular conditions. It is important to provide a well-planned, aggressive, and imaginative contractor VE program to enhance the probability of the success of the VECP effort. Even though initial contractor participation is secured through this type of promotion, the VECP program will not be successful unless a high level of participation is maintained. AASHTO offers the following considerations for maintaining contractor participation: ●

●

●

The state must ensure adequate opportunities for participation by providing a broad incentive clause in contractors’ standard specifications. Contractors must be assured of a fair and objective evaluation of their proposals. The state should take all reasonable measures to create positive attitudes toward contractor change proposals. It may be beneficial to involve the VE administrator in the day-today VECP. Contractors must be assured of timely processing of change proposals. To satisfy this requirement, the state must allocate adequate resources to the program. Additionally, to reduce the time and effort required by a contractor to submit a proposal, the proposal may be submitted first for evaluation. This initial proposal would outline the general technical concepts and the estimated savings.

10.3 VALUE ENGINEERING JOB PLAN CONCEPT As discussed by Wilson (see David C. Wilson, “Value Engineering Applications in Transportation,” NCHRP Synthesis 352, Transportation Research Board, 2005), the VE process may be referred to as the job plan, a defined sequence of activities that are undertaken before, during, and after a VE workshop. During the VE workshop, the VE


809

team learns about the background issues, defines and classifies the project (or product or process) functions, identifies creative approaches to provide the functions, and then evaluates, develops, and presents the VE proposals to key decision makers. It is the focus on the functions that the project, product, or process must perform that sets VE apart from other quality-improvement or cost-reduction approaches. The job plan consists of three work streams that are performed sequentially: the pre-workshop stage, workshop stage, and post-workshop stage. As defined by the SAVE Value Methodology Standard (see “Value Standard and Body of Knowledge,” SAVE, 2007), the workshop stage includes the following six sequential phases. The terminology may differ from that used by some agencies. ●

●

●

●

●

●

Information phase. The team collects and reviews project information to gain an appreciation of issues, concerns, and opportunities. This typically includes developing data models that will highlight high-cost or poor-performing aspects of the project. Function analysis phase. The team determines and classifies functions that the project, product, or process being studied must deliver. The team defines the project functions using a two-word active verb/measurable noun context. The team reviews and analyzes these functions to determine those that need improvement, elimination, or creation to meet project goals. Creativity phase. The team generates a broad range of ideas to achieve functional performance, typically using brainstorming techniques. Evaluation phase. Following a structured evaluation process, the team reviews and selects the ideas that offer the best potential for value improvement. Proper attention must be paid to determining project functions, performance requirements, and resource limits. Development phase. The team prepares VE proposals based on one or more ideas. Each proposal should provide an overview of how the idea is anticipated to work, a balanced assessment of its characteristics, and usually some measure of cost impacts (first or life cycle costs). Presentation phase. The team develops a report and presentation that documents the alternative(s) developed and the value improvement opportunity.

10.4 VALUE ENGINEERING JOB PLAN DETAIL The VE job plan outlines those tasks or functions necessary to properly perform a VE study. Adherence to a definite plan is essential to achieving optimum results. Good results come from a good system, and a good system is one that covers all aspects of a problem or situation to the necessary degree. Use of the job plan provides 1. A vehicle to carry the study from inception to conclusion 2. A convenient way to maintain a written record of the effort as it progresses 3. Assurance that consideration has been given to facts that may have been neglected in the creation of the original design 4. A logical separation of the study into units that can be planned, scheduled, budgeted, and assessed 5. Assurance that proper emphasis is given to the essential creative work of a study and its analysis so that superior choices can be made for further development

810

CHAPTER TEN

The job plan attempts to generate, identify, and select the best-value alternative(s) by making specific recommendations supported with the proper data and identifying the actions necessary for implementation. Further, it provides a proposed implementation schedule and a summary of benefits to the user. The VE job plan is a planned program that has been tested, is being used, and has been proved to work. The VE effort must include all phases of the job plan. However, the proper share of attention given to each phase may differ from one application to another. Judgment is required in determining the depth to which each phase is performed, with consideration given to the resources available and the results expected. An orientation (pre-workshop stage) is usually conducted by a VE manager prior to the assembling of a VE task team. This activity relates to the selection of ideas for VE projects and their planning and authorization. The VE team follows the VE job plan starting with the information phase after the item to be studied has been selected. The number of members of the VE team varies considerably, but usually the job plan is completed by a team of at least five persons.

10.4.1 Information Phase Objectives.

The first phase of the job plan has two basic objectives:

To obtain thorough understanding of the project, system, operation, or item under study by a rigorous review of all of the pertinent factual data To define the value problem by means of functional description accompanied by an estimate of the cost and worth of accomplishing each basic function Key questions.

During this phase, the following key questions must be answered:

What is it? What does it do? What must it do? What does it cost? What is it worth? (What is the least the function could cost?) Procedure 1. Use good human relations. The matter of human relations is of utmost importance to the success of any VE study. “People” problems are sometimes more difficult to resolve than technical problems. The effectiveness of a VE team leader’s efforts depends upon the amount of cooperation the leader obtains from the engineers, designers, estimators, managers, etc. If one is skillful in approach, diplomatic when resolving opposing viewpoints, and tactful in questioning a design requirement or specification, one will minimize the problems of obtaining the cooperation necessary to do the job effectively. 2. Collect information. All pertinent facts concerning the project, system, operation, or item must be drawn together. Getting all the relevant facts and getting them from the best sources are of paramount importance. The VE team should gather complete information consistent with the study schedule. All relevant information is important, regardless of how disorganized or unrelated it may seem when gathered. The data gathered should be supported by tangible evidence in the form of copies of all appropriate


811

documents. Where supported facts are not obtainable, the opinions of knowledgeable persons should be documented. In addition to specific knowledge of the item, it is essential to have all available information concerning the technologies involved, and to be aware of the latest technical developments pertinent to the subject being reviewed. Knowledge of the various construction processes that may be employed is essential. The more information brought to bear on the problem, the more likely the possibility of a substantial cost reduction. Having all the above information would be the ideal situation, but if all of this information is not available, it should not preclude the performance of the VE effort.

10.4.2 Function Analysis Phase The determination of functions is a requisite for all value studies. The decision to pursue the project through the remaining phases of the job plan can be made only by determining function, placing a worth on each required function, and then comparing worth against actual or estimated cost. The determination of function should take place as soon as sufficient information is available to permit determination of true requirements. All members of the VE study team should participate in this exercise because the determination of required function is vital to subsequent phases of the job plan.

10.4.3 Creativity Phase Objective. The objective is to generate, by creative techniques such as brainstorming, numerous alternative means for accomplishing the basic function(s) identified. Key Question. Accomplishing this phase should result in answering the question “What else will do the job, that is, perform the basic function(s)?” The completeness and comprehensiveness of the answer to this question determine to a very high degree the effectiveness and caliber of value work. The greater the number and quality of alternatives identified, the greater the likelihood of developing an outstanding solution. Additional alternatives that have not been considered will usually exist regardless of the skill and proficiency of the study team. Procedure. Consideration of alternative solutions should not formally begin until the problem is thoroughly understood. All members of the VE study team should participate, for the greater the number of ideas conceived, the more likely that really effective, less costly alternatives will be among them. A proper frame of mind is important at this stage of the study; creative thinking should replace the conventional. It should be a unique flight of the imagination, undertaken to generate numerous alternative methods of providing the necessary function(s). Judicial thinking does not belong in this phase. As an aid to speculative thought, the techniques of creative thinking, such as brainstorming, should be employed. Every attempt should be made during this phase to depart from ordinary patterns, typical solutions, and habitual methods. Experience indicates that it is often the new, fresh, and radically different approach that uncovers the best-value solution. The individual or group members may supplement their ideas with those of others—everyone is expected to make a contribution. The best solution may be complete elimination of the present function or item. This possibility should not be overlooked during the initial phases of this step. Perhaps some aspect can be modified which will permit elimination of the function under study. Only

812

CHAPTER TEN

after determining that the function must remain should the study group look for alternative ways to perform the same function at the lowest conceivable cost. Free use of imagination is encouraged so that all possible solutions are considered. A partial list of questions that can be used to stimulate and trigger ideas is given in Table 10.2. The questions shown can be rephrased by substituting terms like project, system, item, or procedure for the words it or part when appropriate. Techniques 1. Blast, create, and refine. This theme has often been used by value engineers. Blast—get off the beaten path. Create—rally for an unusual idea; reach way out for another approach. Refine—strengthen or add to develop an idea to perform basic functions in a new or unique manner. 2. Functional comparison. Conduct a creative problem-solving session (brainstorming) in which new and unusual contributions of known things or processes are combined and/or rearranged to provide different ways to perform basic functions. 3. Simple comparison. Conduct a thorough search for other items that are similar in at least one significant characteristic to the study item. Determine whether they can be modified to satisfy basic functions. 4. Scientific search. Conduct a search for other scientific disciplines capable of performing the same basic function. This often involves interviewing specialists in disciplines that did not previously contribute to solving the problem. An industry (or its representatives) that specializes in some highly skilled technique can often make a substantial contribution when called upon for technical assistance.

10.4.4 Evaluation Phase Objectives. The purpose of this phase is to select the most promising alternatives from among those generated during the previous phase. During the creativity phase there is a conscious effort to prohibit any judicial thinking so as not to inhibit the creative process. But in the evaluation phase, all the alternatives must be critically evaluated because many of them may not be feasible. The alternatives are studied individually and/or grouped for the best solution. Identifying function may seem like a simple process—so simple, in fact, that it seems only a “simple” mind would be required to get the job done. In some ways this is true; a mind that can work in a simple, direct way is required—a mind with the ability to reduce concepts, ideas, and analyses to their best common denominators. The emphasis on function in this phase is what makes the VE approach radically different from any other cost reduction effort. Key Questions. The following questions must be answered about all alternatives being developed during this phase: What does each alternative cost? Will each perform the basic functions? Techniques. Several techniques are available by which alternative ideas can be evaluated and judged. Comparisons can be made between the various advantageous and disadvantageous features of the alternatives under consideration. Advantages and disadvantages of each alternative can be listed and then the ideas sorted according to the relative numbers of advantages and disadvantages. A system of alternately using creative

813

VALUE ENGINEERING AND LIFE CYCLE COST TABLE 10.2

Questions to Stimulate Ideas A. Idea stimulators

Eliminate—combine: Can it be eliminated entirely? Can part of it be eliminated? Can two parts be combined into one? Is there duplication? Can the number of different lengths, colors, types be reduced? Standardize—simplify: Could a standard part be used? Would a modified standard part work? Does the standard contribute to cost? Does anything prevent it from being standardized? Is it too complex? Can connections be simplified? Challenge—identify: Does it do more than is required? Does it cost more than it is worth? Is someone else buying it at lower cost? What is special about it? Is it justified? Can tolerances be relaxed? Have drawings and specifications been coordinated? Maintain—operate: Is it accessible? Are service calls excessive? Would you like to own it and pay for its maintenance? Is labor inordinate to the cost of materials? How often is it actually used? Does it cause problems? Have users established procedures to get around it? Requirements—cost: Are any requirements excessive? Can less expensive materials be used? Is it proprietary? Are factors of safety too high? Are calculations always rounded off on the high side? Would a thinner material work? Could a different finish be used? B. Analysis techniques Review all phases of the program being evaluated (speculation phase). Designate the subordinate problems requiring solution (analysis phase). Determine the data that might help with the evaluation (speculation phase). Determine the most likely sources of data (analysis phase). Conceive as many ideas as possible that relate to the problem (speculation phase). Select for further study ideas most likely to lead to a solution (analysis phase). Consider all possible ways to test the ideas chosen (speculation phase). Select the soundest ways of testing the ideas (analysis phase). Decide on the final idea to be used in the program (analysis phase). (Continued)

814

CHAPTER TEN TABLE 10.2

Questions to Stimulate Ideas (Continued) C. Analysis criteria

Will the idea work? Can it be modified or combined with another? What is the savings potential? What are the chances for implementation? What might be affected? Who might be affected? Will it be relatively difficult or easy to make the change? Will it satisfy all the user’s needs?

and judicial thinking processes for each basic idea to be evaluated can be applied according to the steps shown in the Analysis Techniques portion of Table 10.2. Procedure. Evaluation may be accomplished either by the generating group or by an independent group. Authorities disagree upon which approach is better. The disagreement grows out of the question of whether people who generate ideas can be objective enough in evaluating them. 1. Establish criteria. The first step is to develop a set of evaluation criteria or standards by which to judge the ideas. In developing these criteria, the team should try to anticipate all effects, repercussions, and consequences that might occur in trying to accomplish a solution. The resultant criteria should, in a sense, be a measure of sensitivity to problems (which might be inherent in changes caused by the new idea). In Table 10.3, three sets of criteria that could be used in the analysis phase are presented under Possible ratings. Factors such as these are really the yardsticks by which the effectiveness of each idea can be tested. 2. Screen ideas. The next step in the procedure is the actual ranking, or rating, of ideas according to the criteria developed. No idea should be summarily discarded; all should be given this preliminary evaluation as objectively as possible. In Table 10.3, a three-part system that can be used to rate ideas is presented under Alternative idea. Ratings and their weights are based on the judgment of persons performing the evaluation. This initial analysis will produce a shorter list of alternatives, each of which has passed the evaluation standards set by the team. TABLE 10.3

Typical Analysis Rating System

Alternative idea

Possible ratings

Ability to perform basic function

Excellent Good Fair Poor

Usability of the idea

Use now Modify Hold Reject

Ease of idea implementation considering complexity and schedule

Simple idea Moderately complex Complex idea


815

3. Define alternatives. The remaining alternatives can be ranked according to an estimate of their relative cost reduction potential. The ranking may be based on nothing more than relative estimates comparing the elements, materials, and processes of the alternatives and the original or present method of providing the function. The surviving alternatives are then developed further to obtain more detailed cost estimates. The cost estimating for each alternative proceeds only if the preceding step indicates it still to be a good candidate. Although the analysis phase is the responsibility of the VE team, authorities and specialists should be consulted in estimating the potential of these alternatives. Cost estimates must be as complete, accurate, and consistent as practicable to minimize the possibility of error in assessing the relative economic potential of the alternatives. Specifically, the method used to determine the cost of the original should also be used to cost the alternatives. 4. Make final selection. After the detailed cost estimates are developed for the remaining alternatives, one or more are selected for further study, refinement, testing, and information gathering. Normally, the alternative with the greatest savings potential will be selected. However, if several alternatives are not decisively different at this point, all should be developed further.

10.4.5 Development Phase Objective. In the development phase, the alternatives that have survived the selection process are developed into firm, specific recommendations for change. The process involves not only detailed technical and economic testing but also an assessment of the probability of successful implementation. Key Questions. Several questions must be answered about each alternative during the development of specific solutions: Will it work? Will it meet all necessary requirements? Who has to approve it? What are the implementation problems? What are the costs? What are the savings? Procedures 1. General. To satisfy the questions above, each alternative must be subjected to: a. Careful analysis to ensure that the user’s needs are satisfied b. A determination of technical adequacy c. The development of estimates of costs and implementation expenses, including schedules and costs of all necessary tests d. Consideration of changeover requirements and their impact 2. Develop convincing facts. As in the information phase, the use of good human relations is of considerable importance to the success of the development phase. In developing answers to the questions above, the VE team should consult with personnel knowledgeable about what the item must do, within what constraints it must perform, how dependable the item must be, and under what environmental conditions it must operate. Technical problems related to design, implementation, procurement, or

816

3.

4.

5.

6.

CHAPTER TEN

operation must be determined and resolved. Consideration must also be given to impact in areas such as safety, fire protection, maintenance, and supply support. Develop specific alternatives. Those alternatives that stand up under close technical scrutiny should be followed through to the development of specific designs and recommendations. Work on specifics rather than generalities. Prepare drawings or sketches of alternative solutions to facilitate the identification of problem areas remaining in the design, and to facilitate detailed cost analysis. Perform a detailed cost analysis for proposed alternatives to be included in the final proposal. Development implementation plans. Anticipate problems relating to implementation, and propose specific solutions to each. Particularly helpful in solving such problems are conferences with specialists. Develop a specific recommended course of action for each proposal that details the steps required to implement the idea, who is to do it, and the time required. Ask for ideas from the office that will approve or disapprove the recommendation. Testing. When testing is involved, the VE team may arrange the necessary testing and evaluation, although normally this will be done by other appropriate personnel in the organization. This testing and evaluation should be planned for and scheduled in the recommended implementation process. Select first choice. Finally, one alternative should be selected for implementation as the best-value (best overall cost reduction, usually) alternative, and one or more other recommendations selected for presentation in the event the first choice is rejected by the approval authority. The implementation schedule that will yield the greatest cost reduction should also be indicated.

10.4.6 Presentation Phase Objective. The presentation phase involves the actual preparation and presentation of the best alternatives to persons having the authority to approve the VE proposals. This phase of the VE job plan includes the following steps: 1. Prepare and present the VE proposals. 2. Present a plan of action that will ensure implementation of the selected alternatives. 3. Obtain a decision of positive approval. Discussion. A value engineering proposal (VEP) is almost without fail a challenge to the status quo of any organization. It is a recommendation for change. The recommendation was developed through a team effort, and its adoption is dependent upon another team effort. The success of a VE project is measured by the savings achieved from implemented proposals. Regardless of the effort invested and the merits of the proposal, the net benefit is zero, or is negative, if the proposals are not implemented. Presenting a proposal and subsequently guiding it to implementation often requires more effort than its actual generation. We review here some principles and practices that have been successfully used to facilitate the approval of VEPs: 1. Form. Presentation of a VEP should always be written. Oral presentation of study results is most helpful to the person who is responsible for making the decision; however, it should never replace the written report. A written report normally demands and receives a written reply, whereas oral reports can be forgotten and overlooked as soon as they are presented. In the rush to wrap up a project, promote a great idea, or save the laborious effort of writing a report, many proposals have fallen by the


817

wayside because the oral presentation came first and was inadequate. The systematic approach of the VE job plan must be followed all the way through to include the systematic, meticulous, careful preparation of a written report. From this will evolve a more concise and successful oral presentation. 2. Content. Management responsible for review and approval must base its judgment on the documentation submitted with a proposal. The proposal and supporting documentation should provide all of the data the reviewer will need to reach a decision. Top management is primarily concerned with net benefit and disposition. A manager either may be competent in the areas affected by the proposal or may rely on the advice of a specialist. In either case, completely documented proposals are far more likely to be implemented. Generally, proposals should contain sufficient discussion to ensure the reviewer that performance is not adversely affected, supporting technical information is complete and accurate, potential savings are based on valid cost analysis, and the change is feasible. 3. VEP acceptance. There are many hints that may be offered to improve the probability of and reduce the time required for acceptance and implementation of proposals. Those that appear to be most successful are as follows: a. Consider the reviewer’s needs. Use terminology appropriate to the training and experience of the reviewer. Each proposal is usually directed toward two audiences. First is the technical authority, who requires sufficient technical detail to demonstrate the engineering feasibility of the proposed change. Second are the administrative reviewers, for whom the technical details can be summarized while the financial implications (implementation costs and likely benefits) are emphasized. Long-range effects on policies, procurement, and applications are usually more significant to the manager than to the engineer. b. Prepare periodic progress reports—“no surprises.” The manager who makes an investment in a VE study expects to receive periodic progress reports with estimates of potential results. Reporting is a normal and reasonable requirement of management. It helps ensure top management awareness, support, and participation in any improvement program. There are very few instances where managers have been motivated to act by a one-time exposure at the “final presentation,” no matter how “just” the cause. Therefore, it is advisable to discuss the change with the decision makers or their advisors prior to its submittal as a formal VEP. This practice familiarizes key personnel with impending proposals, and enables them to evaluate them more quickly after submittal. No manager likes to be surprised. Early disclosure may also serve to warn the originators of any objections to the proposal. This “early warning” will give the originators opportunity to incorporate modifications to overcome the objections. Often, the preliminary discussions produce additional suggestions that improve the proposal and enable the decision maker to contribute directly. If management has been kept informed of progress, the VEP presentation may be only a concise summary of final estimates and pro and con discussions, and perhaps trigger formal management approval. c. Relate benefits to organizational objectives. The VEP that represents an advancement toward some approved objective is most likely to receive favorable consideration from management. Therefore, the presentation should exploit all of the advantages a VEP may offer toward fulfilling organizational objectives and goals. When reviewing a VEP, the manager normally seeks either lower total cost of ownership, or increased capability for the same or lesser dollar investment. The objective may be not only savings but also the attainment of some other mission-related goal of the manager. d. Support the decision maker. The monetary yield of a VEP is likely to be improved if it is promptly implemented. Prompt implementation, in turn, is

818

e.

f.

g.

h.

i.

CHAPTER TEN

dependent upon the expeditious approval by the decision makers in each organizational component affected by the proposal. These individuals should be identified and the entire VE effort conducted under their sponsorship. The VE group becomes the decision maker’s staff, preparing information in such a manner that the risk against the potential reward can be weighed. Like any other well-prepared staff report, each VEP should ● Satisfy questions the decision maker is likely to ask ● Respect the decision maker’s authority ● Permit the decision maker to preserve professional integrity ● Imply assurance that approval would enhance image ● Include sufficient documentation to warrant a favorable decision with reasonable risk factors (both technical and economic) Minimize risk. If VE proposals presented to management are to be given serious consideration, they should include adequate evidence of satisfactory return on the investment. Often, current or immediate savings alone will ensure an adequate return. In other cases, life cycle or total program savings must be considered. Either way, evidence of substantial benefits will improve the acceptability of a proposal. The cost and time spent in testing to determine the acceptability of a VE proposal may offset a significant portion of its savings potential. Committing such an investment with no guarantee of success constitutes a risk that could deter acceptance of a VEP. In some cases this risk may be reduced by prudent design and scheduling of test programs to provide intermediate assurances indicating the desirability of continuing with the next step. Thus, the test program may be terminated or the proposal modified when the concept first fails to perform at an acceptable level. Major expenditures for implementing proposed VE actions should not be presented as a lump sum aggregate, but rather as a sequence of minimum risk increments. A manager may be reluctant to risk a total investment against total return, but may be willing to chance the first phase of an investment sequence. Each successive investment increment would be based upon the successful completion of the previous step. Combine testing. Occasionally, a significant reduction in implementation investment is made possible by concurrent testing of two or more proposals. Also, significant reductions in test cost can often be made by scheduling tests into other test programs scheduled within a desirable time. This is particularly true when items to be tested are part of a larger system also being tested. However, care must be exercised in instances of combined testing to prevent masking the feasibility of one concept by the failure of another. Show collateral benefits of the investment. Often VE proposals offer greater benefits than the cost improvements specifically identified. Some of the benefits are collateral in nature and difficult to express in monetary terms. Nevertheless, collateral benefits should be included in the calculations. The likelihood of acceptance of the VEP is improved when all its collateral benefits are clearly identified and completely described. Acknowledge contributors. An implemented VE proposal always results from a group effort. There is a moral obligation to identify all individuals and data sources contributing to a proposal. Identification of contributors also provides the reviewers with a directory of sources from which additional information may be obtained. Individuals, departments, and organizations should be commended whenever possible. This recognition promotes cooperation and participation essential to the success of subsequent VE efforts. Prepare the oral presentation. The oral presentation can be the keystone to selling a proposal. It gives the VE team a chance to ensure that the written proposal is


819

correctly understood and that proper communication exists between the parties concerned. Effectiveness of the presentation will be enhanced if ● The entire team is present and is introduced ● The presentation is relatively short with time for questions at the end ● The presentation is illustrated through the use of visual aids such as mock-ups, models, slides, or flip charts ● The team is prepared with sufficient backup material to answer all questions during the presentation 10.4.7 Post-Workshop Stage Objective. The VE manager must ensure that approved recommendations are converted into actions. Until this is done, savings to offset will not be achieved. Three major objectives of this phase are: 1. To provide assistance, clear up misconceptions, and resolve problems that may develop in the implementation process 2. To minimize delays encountered by the proposal in the implementation process 3. To ensure that approved ideas are not modified during the implementation process in such a manner as would cause them to lose their cost-effectiveness or basis for original selection Implementation Investment. The need to invest in order to save must be emphasized when submitting VEPs. Some degree of investment is usually required if a VE opportunity is to become a reality. Funds and/or personnel for implementation have to be provided. The key to successful implementation lies in placing orders for the necessary actions into the normal routine of business. Progress should be reviewed periodically to ensure that any roadblocks that arise are overcome promptly. Expediting Implementation. One of the fastest ways to achieve implementation of an idea is to effectively utilize the knowledge gained by those who originated it. Whenever possible, the VE team should be required to prepare first drafts of documents necessary to revise handbooks, specifications, change orders, drawings, and contract requirements. Such drafts will help to ensure proper translation of the idea into action and will serve as a baseline from which to monitor progress of final implementation. To further ensure proper communication and translation of the idea onto paper, the VE team should review all implementation actions prior to final release. Monitoring Progress. Implementation progress must be monitored just as systematically as the VEP development. It is the responsibility of the management or the VE manager to ensure that implementation is actually achieved. A person should be designated by name with responsibility to monitor all deadline dates in the implementation plan. Objective. The last phase of the job plan has several objectives; these might seem quite diverse, but when achieved in total, they will serve to foster and promote the success of subsequent VE efforts: 1. Obtain final copies of all completed implementation actions. 2. Compare actual results with original expectations. 3. Submit cost savings achievement reports to management. This will allow calculation of the total return on investment (ROI) of the VE effort.

820

CHAPTER TEN

4. Submit technical reports to management for possible use elsewhere. 5. Evaluate conduct of the project to identify problems that arose and recommend corrective action for the next project. 6. Initiate recommendations for potential VE study on ideas evolving from the study just completed. 7. Screen all contributors to the VEP for possible receipt of an award and initiate recommendations for appropriate recognition. Discussion. A VE project is not completed with implementation of an idea. Full benefit is not derived from a VEP until the follow-up phase is completed. Until then, the records on a project cannot be closed. It is the responsibility of the VE manager to designate some individual to complete this phase. Certain key questions must be answered to assess accomplishments: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Did the idea work? Did it save money? Would you do it again? Could it benefit others? Has it been forwarded properly? Has it had proper publicity? Should any awards be made?

10.5 FAST DIAGRAMMING AND THE JOB PLAN Function analysis system technique (FAST) is a diagramming technique to graphically show the logical relationships of the functions of an item, system, or procedure. FAST was developed in 1964 by Charles V. Bytheway at the UNIVAC Division of the Sperry Rand Corporation. Prior to the development of FAST, one had to perform a function analysis of an item by random identification of functions. The basic function had to be identified by trial and error, and one was never quite sure that all functions had been uncovered. FAST provides a system to do a better job in function analysis. 10.5.1 Purpose of the FAST Diagram The FAST diagram should be created during the information phase of the VE job plan by the whole VE team. When used in conjunction with a value study, the FAST diagram serves the following purposes: 1. It helps organize random listing of functions. When answering the questions “What is it?”, “What does it do?”, “What must it do?”, the study team develops many verbnoun function solutions at all levels of activity, which the FAST diagram can help sort out and interrelate. 2. It helps check for missing functions that might be overlooked in the above random function identification process. 3. It aids in the identification of the basic function or scope of the study. 4. It deepens and guides the involvement, visualization, and understanding of the problem to be solved and the proposed changes.


821

5. It demonstrates that the task team has completely analyzed the subject or problem. 6. It tests the functions through the system of determinate logic. 7. It results in team consensus in defining the problem in function terms and aids in developing more creative valid alternatives. 8. It is particularly helpful in “selling” the resulting changes to the decision makers.

10.5.2 Guidelines for FAST Diagrams Figure 10.1 depicts the diagramming conventions to be used in preparing a FAST diagram. The relative positions of functions as displayed on the diagram are also levels of activity. The FAST diagram is a horizontal graphical display based on system functions rather than system flowcharting or components. Level 1 functions, the higher-level functions, appear on the left side of the FAST diagram, with lower-level activity successively graphed to the right as shown. In most cases, when conducting a VE study, various levels of activity of verb-noun functions will be automatically suggested as the basic function of an item or a system. The FAST diagram is just a tool. It is the process used in creating the diagram that is important, not the final diagram itself or its appearance. There is no such thing as a How?

When?

Why?

Design objective Design objective

One-time functions

Functions that happen “all the time”

Design objective

Critical path of functions Higherorder function

Basic function

Required secondary function



Functions that happen “at the same time” and/or “are caused by” some other function Required Required secondary secondary function function

Unwanted secondary function

Unwanted secondary function

Scope of problem under study

FIGURE 10.1


FAST diagram: functional analysis system technique.

Assumed function

822

CHAPTER TEN

“right” or perfect schoolbook solution that each diagrammer should be able to create, if he or she had perfect knowledge of the technique and theory. Yet if the diagram logic is logical to the diagrammer, it will normally be logical to a reviewer. And if it is not, then the FAST diagram will have served another purpose—communication of a misunderstanding in statement of the problem. That is also valuable to know. With these things in mind, consider the following guidelines in preparing a diagram: 1. Show the scope of the problem under study by two vertical dashed lines, one to the extreme left and one to the extreme right of the diagram. Everything that lies between the two scope lines is defined as the problem under study. 2. Every FAST diagram will have a “critical path of functions” going from left to right across the scope lines. 3. On that critical path should be found only required secondary functions, the basic function(s), and the higher-order function. 4. The higher-order function will lie to the immediate left of the left scope line. 5. The basic function(s) will always lie to the immediate right of the left scope line. 6. All other functions on the critical path will lie to the right of the basic function and will be the required secondary functions (not normally aesthetic or unwanted secondary functions). 7. Any “assumed” functions lie to the right of the right-hand scope line. 8. All other secondary functions the item performs will lie either above or below the critical path of functions. These functions can be required secondary functions, aesthetic functions, or unwanted functions. 9. If the function “happens at the same time as” and/or “is caused by” some function on the critical path, place the function below that critical path function. 10. If the function happens “all the time” the system is doing its work, place it above the critical path function to the extreme right of the diagram. 11. If there are specific design objectives or general specifications to keep in mind as the diagram is constructed, place them above the basic function and show them as dotted boxes. 12. All “one-time” actions are placed above the critical path and in the center area of the diagram. 13. All functions that lie on the critical path must take place to accomplish the basic function. All other functions on the FAST diagram are subordinate to the critical path function and may or may not have to take place to accomplish the basic functions.

10.5.3 Steps in Construction of FAST Diagrams The following steps are recommended in the construction of the FAST diagram: 1. Function listing. Prepare a list of all functions, by assembly or by system, using the verb-and-noun technique of identification of function. Do this by brainstorming the questions (a) “What does it do?” and (b) “What must it do?” 2. The function worksheet. Using lined paper, prepare a three-column function worksheet in the format shown in Fig. 10.2. Insert the listed functions from above, one at a time, into the central column. Then, ask of each function the following questions: a. How do I (verb) (noun)? Record the answer(s) in the right column. b. Why do I (verb) (noun)? Record the answer(s) in the left column.


Why?

FIGURE 10.2

Function

823

How?

Function worksheet for FAST.

3. The diagram layout. Next, write each function separately on a small card in verband-noun terminology. Select a card with the function that you consider to be the basic function. Determine the position of the next higher and lower function cards by answering the following logic questions: a. Perform the “how” test by asking of any function the question, “How do I (verb) (noun)?” The function answer should lie to the immediate right. Every function that has a function to its immediate right should logically answer the “how” test. If it does not, either the function is improperly described or a function is in the wrong place. b. The second test, “why,” works in the same way, but in the opposite direction. Ask the question “Why do I (verb) (noun)?” The answer should be in the function to the immediate left and should read, “So that I can (verb) (noun).” The answer must make sense and be logical.

824

CHAPTER TEN

4. The critical path. To determine whether a function belongs on the critical path, test the functions with these questions: a. How is (verb) (noun) actually accomplished, or how is it proposed to be accomplished? b. Why must (verb) (noun) be performed? 5. The support logic block. A support logic block is a block immediately underneath a given block at the same general level of activity. This contains functions that “happen at the same time as” and/or “are caused by” some other function. They can be determined by answering these questions: a. When is (verb) (noun) performed? b. If (verb) (noun) is performed, what else must also happen? 6. Locating the scope lines. In determining where to place the scope lines, the choice is arbitrary. Actually, moving the left scope line from left to right lowers the level of activity of the problem to be studied. The basic function to be studied shifts, since it is always the function that lies to the immediate right of the left scope line. Locating the right scope line determines the assumptions and “givens” one is willing to accept before starting the study. Location of both scope lines is also subject to the point of view of the owner or user of the problem. See NCHRP Synthesis 352 for an example of a FAST diagram for a highway application.

10.5.4 Diagramming Techniques The following three considerations are general techniques that should be followed: 1. Usually only two FAST diagrams are of interest: the diagram that represents an existing plan, program, or design, and the diagram that represents the proposed concept. When diagramming something that exists, be sure not to slip off on a tangent and include alternatives and choices that are not present in the existing system. 2. When using a FAST diagram to design or propose a new concept, restrict it to a specific concept; otherwise, the answers created in diagramming become meaningless. The “method selected” to perform a function brings many other functions into existence. Therefore, creation of several FAST diagrams during system design is a possibility. 3. The choice of the level of detail of functions to be used in the FAST diagram is entirely dependent on the point of view of the diagrammer, the purpose for which it is to be used, and to whom it will be presented. For presentation of VE study results to management, a very detailed FAST diagram should be simplified. 10.5.5 Summary of FAST Diagramming 1. FAST is a structured method of function analysis that results in analyzing the basic function, establishing critical path functions and supporting functions, and identifying unnecessary functions. 2. FAST diagrams should be constructed at a level low enough to be useful, but high enough to be advantageous to the purpose of creatively seeking alternative methods. 3. FAST diagrams are used to communicate with subject matter experts; to understand the problems of specialists in their own profession; to define, simplify, and clarify problems; to bound the scope of a problem; and to show the interrelated string of functions needed to provide a product or service.


825

4. The FAST procedure will be useful only if thinking outlined in the steps to prepare a diagram is performed. The value of this technique is found not in recording the obvious, but in the extension of thinking beyond usual habits as the study proceeds. 5. A FAST diagram, as first constructed, may not completely comply with “how” and “why” logic. This is because it takes additional thinking to get everything to agree. However, when you are persistent and insist that the logic be adhered to, you will discover that your understanding has expanded and your creativity has led you into avenues that would not otherwise have been pursued. When the “how” and “why” logic is not satisfied, it suggests that either a function is missing or the function under investigation is a supporting function and not on the critical path. 6. A main benefit from using FAST diagramming and performing an extensive function analysis is to correct our ignorance factor, so that we can see the study in its true light. Once this function analysis is performed on a given topic, we can quickly see that the only reason a lower-level function has to be performed is because a higher-level function caused it to come into being. Essentially, whenever we establish one of these functional relationships that is visually presented by a FAST diagram, we correct our ignorance factor and open the door to greater creativity.

10.6 COST MODEL A cost model is a diagrammatic form of a cost estimate. It is used as a tool in the VE process to provide increased visibility of the cost of the various elements of a system or an item, to aid in identifying the item’s subelements most suitable for cost reduction attention, and to establish cost targets for comparison of alternative approaches. It also helps define the worth of an element. A cost model is an expression of the cost distribution associated with a specific item, product, or system. In industry, it is often referred to as a work breakdown structure. A cost model is developed by first identifying assembly, subassembly, and major component elements or centers of work. From this, the model can be expanded to include a parts breakdown at more minute levels, as necessary. Next, the costs are developed (actual, estimated, or budgeted) for each of the above categories. These become the cost elements of the model and can be viewed as the cost building blocks of cost buildup from successive levels. Shown in Fig. 10.3 are five common categories of cost for a government construction program. Some additional items that should be considered, particularly for a commercial project, include cost of land, financing charges, building permits, and taxes.

10.7 WORTH MODEL The same form of model used to distribute cost of a system can be used to allocate worth. The cost model and the worth model should be identical in format. The procedures to follow in creating a worth model are as follows: 1. First, the VE team determines the necessary functions to be performed by each element of work at the lowest level of activity of the cost model. 2. The worth of each of these functions is determined as explained in the job plan.

826

CHAPTER TEN

Estimated Total Program Costs (ETPC)

Estimated Construction Cost (ECC)

Estimated Site Cost (ESC)

Estimated Reservation Cost (ERC)

Estimated Design and Review Cost (EDRC)

Estimated Management and Inspection Cost (EMIC)

Building

Acquisition

Equipment

Contract admin.

Contract admin.

Approach work

Appraisal

Furnishings

A-E fee

Inspection

Advertising

Fine arts

CM fee

A-E fee

Legal fees

Relocation

VE services

CM fee

Filing fees

Change orders

Design review

VE services

Surveys

Environmental

Special studies

Steel testing

Demolition

Historic preservation

Reproduction

Concrete tests

Travel

CPM updating

CPM updating

Travel

Soil borings

Partition drawings

Site preparation

Operating manuals FIGURE 10.3

Design changes

Cost model for construction program.

3. The worth of all functions for each cost element is totaled and becomes the worth for that element. 4. The sum of the worth of all cost elements becomes the worth of the corresponding cost element at the next higher level. Thus, the VE team develops the minimum costs it believes are possible for each block of the cost model. The result is a cost model representing minimum costs. These costs become targets to be compared with costs as reflected by the best estimates available. Cost blocks having the greatest differences between target and estimated costs are then selected for VE study. (H. G. Tufty, Compendium on Value Engineering, Indo-American Society, Bombay, 1989.)

10.8 CONSIDERATIONS IN LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS Life cycle cost (LCC) is the total cost of ownership of an item, computed over its useful life. To rationally compare the worth of alternative designs, or different ways to do a job (accomplish a function), an LCC analysis is made of each. For those who follow the


827

VE job plan, a life cycle cost analysis is very easy to perform because the total impact of each recommended VE alternative is an integral part of the total calculations. In reality, an LCC study uses VE techniques to identify all costs related to the subject (functional) area, and VE’s special contribution can be the selection of the best alternatives to be “life cycle–costed.” LCC is the development of all significant costs of acquiring, owning, and using an item, a system, or a service over a specified length of time. LCC is a method used to compare and evaluate the total costs of competing solutions to satisfy identical functions based on the anticipated life of the facility or product to be acquired. In performing a value study, an LCC analysis is performed in the development phase of the value engineering job plan to determine the least costly alternative. The value of an item includes not only consideration of what it costs to acquire it, but also the cost to use it or the cost of performance to the buyer for as long as the item is needed. The buyer, not the seller, pays the life cycle costs and therefore must determine value. One measure of value to the buyer is the calculated total cost of ownership. Costs of repair, operations, preventive maintenance, logistic support, utilities, depreciation, and replacement, in addition to capital cost, all reflect on the total value of a product to a consumer. Calculation of the LCC for each alternative during performance of a value study is a way to judge whether product quality is being maintained in sufficient degree to prevent degradation of reliability, performance, and maintainability. Life cycle cost analysis requires the knowledge of several economic concepts. One of these is the concept of equivalent costs in relation to time. Equivalent costs are typically developed by equating all costs to a common time baseline using interest rates to adjust for variable expenditure years. One must also hold the economic conditions constant while the cost consequences of each alternative are being developed. That is, the same economic factors are applied to each alternative using a uniform methodology.

10.8.1 Design Life The first task one must accomplish in performing an LCC analysis is to determine the period of time for which the analysis of accumulated costs is to occur. This will usually be designated the project design life. The life span of the facility to be analyzed (a bridge, pavement, or culvert pipe) must be determined, together with the associated maintenance and rehabilitation costs. Another consideration that must be addressed is the realization that individual life spans of components of a system may be quite different. For example, in considering a highway system, the life of a bridge will likely be much longer than the life of a pavement. In considering a building, the life of the structural framework may well be 100 years or more, whereas the life of the roof may be only 20 years. In performing a value study, the project design life or life span that should be selected is the period of time over which the owner or user of a product or facility needs the item. The user’s need determines the life span when judging LCC and worth, and when comparing alternatives. The life span should be a realistic, reasonable time, and the same life span must be used for evaluating all choices. Assessment of obsolescence is part of a rational determination of design life. One must estimate how far in the future the functional capacity will be adequate. An unrealistically long design life may result in excessive expenditures on initial costs. On the other hand, an unrealistically short design life may lead to expensive replacement at a premature date. The salvage or residual value at the end of the project design life must be determined and accounted for in the analysis. This may represent a net scrap value or the value associated with the reuse of a component, if that is feasible.

828

CHAPTER TEN

10.8.2 Discount Rates The discount rate is used to convert costs occurring at different times to equivalent costs in present dollars. The selection of the discount rate to be used in the calculations is very important. If a low discount rate is selected, greater significance is given to future expenditures. If a high discount rate is selected, less significance is given to future expenditures. The discount rate should represent the rate of interest that makes the owner indifferent regarding whether to pay a sum now or at a future time. In government projects, the discount rate may be mandated by policy or law. The Office of Management and Budget prescribes rules for federal projects in Circular A-94. It states that the discount rate represents an estimate of the average rate of return on private investment, before taxes and after inflation. Thus, it may differ from the cost of borrowing. Guidelines on discount rates may be further amplified by federal agencies.

10.9 CATEGORIES OF COSTS Costs that must be considered depend to some extent upon the system or project analyzed, but can generally be categorized as follows: 1. Initial costs a. Item costs. These are costs to produce or construct the item. b. Development costs. These are costs associated with conducting the value study, testing, building a prototype, designing, and constructing models. c. Implementation costs. These are costs expected to occur after approval of the ideas, such as redesign, tooling, inspection, testing, contract administration, training, and documentation. d. Miscellaneous costs. These costs depend on the item and include costs for owner-furnished equipment, financing, licenses and fees, and other one-time expenditures. 2. Annual recurring costs a. Operation costs. These costs include estimated annual expenditures associated with the item such as for utilities, fuel, custodial care, insurance, taxes and other fees, and labor. b. Maintenance costs. These costs include annual expenditures for scheduled upkeep and preventive maintenance to keep an item in operable condition. c. Other recurring costs. These include costs for annual use of equipment associated with an item as well as annual support costs for management overhead. 3. Nonrecurring costs a. Repair and replacement costs. These are costs estimated on the basis of predicted failure and replacement of major system components, predicted alteration costs for categories of space related to the frequency of moves, and capital improvements predicted necessary to bring systems up to current standards at given points in time. Each estimated cost is for a specific year in the future. b. Salvage. Salvage value is often referred to as residual value. Salvage value is not really a cost, in that this factor is entered as a negative amount in the LCC calculation to reduce the LCC amount. Salvage value represents the remaining market value or use value of an item at the end of the selected LCC life span.


829

10.10 METHODS OF CALCULATION The concepts of annualized cost and present worth are employed in LCC. Using the annualized cost method, all costs incurred are converted to equivalent annual costs using a baseline and a specified life span. For example, initial costs would be amortized over the life cycle and include principal and interest (similar to home mortgage payments). Replacement costs or rehabilitation costs at various points during the life cycle would also be converted to equivalent annual costs (sinking fund). The following steps can be employed: 1. Annualized initial cost. Tabulate all initial (acquisition) costs. These include the base cost of each of the alternative systems and any other initial cost. Total these initial expenditures to arrive at the total initial cost (IC). Next, amortize the initial costs (IC) by determining the annual payment necessary to pay off a loan equaling the total initial cost. Using a capital recovery table or the following equation, find the periodic payment (PP) necessary to pay off $1.00 at a discount rate of r over a period of n years. Each total initial cost is multiplied by this factor to determine the annualized cost for this element. r PP 1 (1 r) n 2. Annual recurring cost. The next step is to tabulate, for each alternative, the average annually recurring costs for operations, maintenance, and other known factors. 3. Annualized nonrecurring cost. Next, determine the replacement or rehabilitation costs for all major items, for each alternative, at appropriate times during the life span. Also determine the salvage value at the end of the life span. Each of the replacement costs is then discounted from the point in time where the funds are to be expended. Multiply each cost by the present worth factor (PW) from a table or calculated by the equation PW (1 r) n Then, the present worth of these replacement and salvage costs is reduced to a uniform series of payments by applying the same capital recovery periodic payment factor (PP) used in step 1. Salvage or residual values are treated similarly except that the resulting costs are negative. 4. Total annual cost. Finally, sum the annualized initial cost, annual recurring cost, and annualized nonrecurring cost for each alternative to determine total annual costs. These costs represent a uniform baseline of comparison for the alternatives over a projected life span at a selected interest rate. The annual differences are then determined and used for recommendations. 5. Present worth of annual difference. To determine the real value of an annual cost difference, calculate its present worth. Multiply each cost by the present worth annuity factor (PWA), which shows how much $1.00 paid out periodically is worth today in real dollars. The factor may be obtained from a table or calculated by the equation 1 (1 r) n PWA r Thus, one may then compare the present worth of each alternative to assess the benefit derived.

830

CHAPTER TEN

6. Effect of inflation. The effect of inflation should be considered in the calculations when determining annual recurring cost, replacement cost, and salvage value, If inflation is constant at a rate i, costs at a future date of y years can be found by multiplying the cost by an inflation factor (IF) given by the equation IF (1 i) y Thus, the calculations can be made using costs that allow for inflation. Using this procedure, different costs can be adjusted for different levels of inflation, if there is information to support such choices. More complex methods for handling inflation are also available. If the items being compared do not involve different annual costs, it is more direct to make the present worth calculation directly. Future nonrecurring costs over the project design life can be reduced to their present worth value by multiplying by the PW factor given above, PW (1 + r) n. These are added to the initial costs to determine total present worth of each system. The present worth of alternative systems can then be compared.

10.10.1 Example of Calculations A simple example to illustrate the above calculation method is presented in Table 10.4. In this example, inflation is handled by using a net discount rate equal to the nominal discount rate (assumed as 10 percent) minus the rate of inflation (assumed as 5 percent). Two pipe materials are being considered for a drainage application where the project design life is 50 years. Initial costs associated with pipe A are $150,000, and those associated with pipe B are $180,000. Pipe A will require a $37,400 rehabilitation at the end of 40 years, and pipe B a $25,000 rehabilitation at the end of 45 years. Pipe A will have no salvage value, and pipe B will have a salvage value of $30,000. For illustrative purposes, each is assumed to have an annual maintenance cost of $1000. Calculations in part A show that for the assumed conditions, pipe A will have the lower annualized cost and the present worth of the difference in annual cost is $24,900. Calculations in part B show the same difference in present worth, since the annual recurring costs are the same in this example. (For an example of LCC in pavements, see Art. 3.11.) Life cycle costing is a technique to assess the total cost consequences between alternatives. The potential to optimize value through LCC is only as good as the alternatives being considered. It should be used in proper sequence as part of the VE effort. (H. G. Tufty, Compendium on Value Engineering, Indo-American Society, Bombay, 1989; “Value Engineering and Least Cost Analysis,” Handbook of Steel Drainage and Highway Construction Products, AISI, Washington, D.C., 1994.)

10.11 EXAMPLES OF SUCCESSFUL VE HIGHWAY STUDIES To recognize outstanding VE achievements and promote awareness of the importance of this program, the AASHTO Value Engineering Task Force has established national awards to be given to state transportation agencies. These awards are presented every 2 years to agencies that have shown special achievement in either cost-effectiveness or innovation.

831

VALUE ENGINEERING AND LIFE CYCLE COST TABLE 10.4

Life Cycle Cost Calculations for Two Pipes A. Annualized cost method Pipe A

Type of cost Initial

Recurring Non-recurring (rehab.)

Non-recurring (salvage)*

Total

Equation for factor

Factor

PP r /[1 (1 r) n]

0.0548

Pipe B

Annualized cost, $

Factor

n 50

$150,000 0.0548 $8216

n 50

$180,000 0.0548 $9864

—

—

$1000

—

1000

PW (1 + r) n

0.1420 n 40

0.0548

Annualized cost, $

$37,400 0.1113 $25,000 0.142 0.0548 0.1113 0.0548 291 n 45 $152

PW (1 + r) n

—

—

0.0872

—

—

$8507

$30,000 0.0872 0.0548 n 50 $143 —

$9873

Pipe A has the lower annualized cost. Annual difference $9873 8507 $1366. Present worth of annual difference (1/0.0548) $1366 $24,900. *Note that salvage values are treated as negative numbers in the summations for annualized cost and present worth.

B. Direct present worth method Pipe A Type of cost Initial Non-recurring (rehab.) Non-recurring (salvage)* Total

Equation for factor

Pipe B

Factor

Present worth, $

Factor

Present worth, $

—

—

$150,000

—

$180,000

PW (1 + r) n

0.1420

$37,400 0.142 $5311

0.1113

$25,000 0.1113 $2782

n 40

PW (1 + r) n

—

—

—

n 45 0.0872 n 50

$30,000 0.0872 $2616

—

$180,166

— $155,311

Pipe A has the lower cost based on present worth. Difference in present worth $180,166 155,311 $24,900 (same result as in part A). *Note that salvage values are treated as negative numbers in the summations for annualized cost and present worth.

832

CHAPTER TEN

The VE Task Force presents the awards in the categories of (1) process improvement, (2) project delivery, and (3) preconstruction engineering (design, utilities, rightof-way, and construction). The awards for 2007 for the most value added proposals are summarized below. Category: Improved Process Agency: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Project: Antioch and Dumbarton bridges Geotechnical Investigation Requirements to Develop Retrofit Strategy Citation: This unique study analyzed the geotechnical investigation requirements necessary to develop the strategy that leads to retrofit recommendations for the Antioch and Dumbarton bridges. Caltrans will use this study to develop an appropriate retrofit strategy for each bridge. The baseline scope placed heavy emphasis on conducting new explorations and associated laboratory testing to obtain more dependable data (baseline estimate of $12,100,000). The value analysis (VA) team concluded that the objectives of the investigation could be achieved with fewer new exploratory borings drilled to somewhat shallower depths. Other recommended alternatives also improved the project and lowered cost, with implemented savings of $2,350,000 or 19 percent. All recommended alternatives were accepted and implemented.

Category: Project Delivery Agency: Minnesota Department of Transportation Project: TH 212 Design-Build Project, State Project No. SP 1017 12 Citation: The TH 212 Design-Build Project is a $238 million construction project consisting of 11.75 miles of new four-lane divided highway realignment, 7 interchanges, 28 bridges, and numerous retaining and noise walls. The VE proposal is to eliminate a bridge and provide for the realignment of a crossing road to intersect where the main line creek crossing occurs. This combined crossing concentrates impacts and construction activities in one location. This change minimizes environmental impacts to the creek, the big woods remnant vegetation, and the flood plains, and reduces slope stability issues. The VE impacts include savings in project costs, and reduced construction impacts and future maintenance activities. The new design eliminates an insufficient horizontal curve design exception, improves sight distance at an intersection, reduces the total acreage disturbed, and creates less impervious area.

Category: Preconstruction Engineering < $25 Million Agency: Florida Department of Transportation Project: Protection of US 98 on Okaloosa Island Citation: US 98 on Okaloosa Island has been damaged by storm surges from at least five tropical events in the last ten years, resulting in more than $16 million in repair work. The purpose of this project was to provide additional protective features to reduce the potential for future damage from similar storm events. The District wanted the additional protection in place prior to the next storm season, which required the project to be designed and constructed in less than one year. The recommendation developed by the team and accepted by management reduced the cost of the $20.6 million project by $8.3 million, or 40 percent, and also reduced the construction time by 50 percent. A key product innovation from the VE team was the recommendation to use Teflon sheet piling to replace conventional concrete sheet piling.


833

Category: Preconstruction Engineering $25–$75 Million Agency: Transport Canada, Ontario Ministry of Transportation, and the City of Windsor Project: Let’s Get Windsor Essex Moving, Walker Road and Howard Avenue Grade Separations VE and Risk Study Citation: Security measures at the U.S. border have caused significant traffic problems in the City of Windsor. One of the problems was the need to x-ray rail cars entering the United States, which reduced train speed and increased traffic delays at major arterial road-rail crossings in the city. An immediate and concerted effort was put into place to grade separate two major urban road crossings. The original project cost estimates increased dramatically due to the rushed design, limited property, business and industrial activities, traffic operations, and a myriad of major utility issues. A VE study and Cost Risk analysis improved communication with the city, Transport Canada, Ontario Ministry of Transportation, and designers; saved $2 million; identified risks; brought certainty to the cost estimates; and clarified project scope.

Category: Preconstruction Engineering >$75 Million Agency: New Jersey Department of Transportation Project: Route 52 Causeway Replacement Contract A Citation: The Route 52 Causeway Replacement Contract A project involves the replacement of 1.2 miles of existing Route 52 Causeway, including 2 structures displaying structural, geometric, and safety deficiencies. Bids far exceeded original estimates. The VE repackaging of Contract A converted Rainbow Island from bridge structure to roadway by grade touchdown utilizing fill. Additionally, the VE changes introduced conventional fixed bridges as an alternate design to high-level bascule bridges. VE design and bridge changes reflected through this repackaging effort resulted in a low bid of $141,350,400, with a net savings of $88,636,000, and improved constructibility by acquiring environmental permits that allowed timely construction without seasonal delays.

Category: Preconstruction Engineering >$75 Million—Honorable Mention Agency: Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) Project: 755 Segment of Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail Project Citation: The 755 Segment of Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail Project extends approximately 5 miles, from the Boeing Access Road to a station at Southcenter Boulevard. This LRT guideway is mostly elevated and parallels or crosses over Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) freeways along much of its route. The design team undertook an intensive value engineering study of the 30 percent preliminary design at the beginning of the final design assignment. The VE study identified significant configuration changes that were forecast to save $23 million and approximately 8 months of construction duration. Sound Transit evaluated and accepted the recommendations for incorporation into the final design. The potential savings and other benefits identified in the value engineering work were validated by the bids received and continue to be realized during construction of the $234 million project.


INDEX

835


Access control: defined, 184 geometric design, by, 184 statute, by, 2, 184 zoning, by, 184 Acoustical concepts, 776–777 Acoustical design, 777–778 Acoustical standards, 777–778 Air quality: ambient air quality standards, 23 Clean Air Act (CAA), 23–26, 42 emission standards, 23–26 Asphalt concrete (see Pavement, flexible)

Barriers, end treatments for: backslope anchorage, 524 Beam-Eating (BEST), 523, 525 concrete, sloped, 523, 525–526 eccentric loader (ELT), 523–524 Extruder, 523, 525 Flared Energy-Absorbing (FLEAT), 523, 525 Narrow Energy-Absorbing (NEAT), 523, 525 QuadTrend-350, 523, 525 Regent, 523, 524 Sequential Kinking (SKT-350), 523, 525 three-cable, 523 Vermont low-speed, 523, 524 Wyoming Box Beam, 523, 524 (See also Crash cushions) Barriers, median: characteristics of, 506, 507–512 classification of, 507, 509 deflection of, 507, 509, 510–519 placement of, 506, 515–517, 520 Barriers, median (Cont.): selection of, 507 transitions, 514 types of: box beam, 509, 512 concrete, single-slope, 509, 510–512, 518 concrete, vertical wall, 509, 510–512 concrete safety shape,510–512, 515–518 movable concrete barrier, 509, 512, 519 three-cable, 507, 509, 510 thrie-beam, strong-post, 509, 510, 514 W-beam, strong-post, 509, 510, 513 W-beam, weak-post, 509, 511 warrants for, 506 Barriers, roadside: characteristics of, 491 classification of, 491, 493 deflection of, 491, 503, 542 placement of: area of concern, lateral extent of, 504–505 clear zone, relation to, 505 considerations, 502 flare rate, 503–504 lateral offset, 502–503 layout, 504–506 length of need, 504–506 runout length, 504–505

837

shy line offset, 502–503 slopes, on, 515–516 terrain effects, 503 selection of, 499–501, 502


Barriers, roadside (Cont.): types of: box beam, weak-post, 493, 496 concrete safety shape, 493, 498–499, 501 flexible, 492–495 rigid, 493, 498–499 semirigid, 493, 496–498 three-cable, 492–493, 494 thrie-beam, blocked-out, strong post, 493, 496, 498 thrie-beam, modified, 493, 496–497, 499 timber-rail, steel-backed, 493, 498, 500 wall, stone masonry, 493, 499, 501 W-beam, blocked-out, strong-post, 493, 496, 497 W-beam, weak-post, 493, 496, 498 upgrading of, 506, 507 warrants for: considerations, 488–490, 492 defined, 489 embankments, 489–490 obstacles, 490, 492 Bikeways, 67, 69, 162 Bridges: aesthetics of, 313, 321, 335, 338, 341, 344, 351 bearings for: disk, 353 elastomeric, 342, 349, 352–353 pin, 349, 351, 352 pot, 353–354 requirements, 348–349 rocker and bolster, 350–351 roller, 352 sliding plate, 349–350, 351, 352 types of, 349 clearances for, 315–316 corrosion protection systems for: coating, fusion bonded, 326, 329 galvanizing, 321, 323, 326, 329, 351 metallizing, 329, 351 paint, 328–329, 330, 335, 342, 346–347 selection of, 328–329 cost of, 326, 341–344 decks for: cast-in-place concrete, 321, 324 construction of, 318, 321–323, 324–325 design of, 323–324 drainage of, 347–348 precast concrete, 321–322, 324–325 prestressed concrete, 321–322, 324–325 protection of, 325–327 repair of, 327 Bridges, decks for (Cont.): steel, corrugated, 323, 324 steel, grid type, 322 steel, orthotropic, 323 timber, 316, 321 design of: alternative bids in, 328, 329, 336 beam and girder spacing in, 342, 343 consultants for, 311–312 contracts for, 312 economics in, 341–344, 345 specifications for, 313–314, 315, 320, 323, 346 drainage for (see Safety, roadside) geometrics of, 314–316 inspection of, 346, 347, 354

838

joints in: deflection type, 330–331 expansion type, 331–335 seals for, 332–335 materials for: aluminum, 320 concrete, 316–318, 321–322, 325–328 elastomers, 332, 333–334, 342, 349, 352–354 rubber, 320–321, 325, 352 selection of, 327–328, 336–344 steel, 318–320, 327–328 steel, weathering, 319, 328, 329–330, 342, 348 stone, 321 timber, 316, 321 paint removal on, 346–347 (See also Lead-based paint) piers for, 313, 315, 321, 354–355 railing retrofits for: concrete, 519, 521 concrete safety shape, 521 post-and-beam, metal, 521 thrie-beam, 521 W-beam, 521 railings for: aluminum, 320 clearance, 314–315 crash testing of, 521–522 design of, 517, 521–522 function of, 517 placement of, 518–519 selection of, 518 transitions to, 522 railroad crossing, 315–316 rehabilitation of, 321–322, 344–346


Bridges (Cont.): repainting, 346–347 (See also Lead-based paint) replacement of, 410, 411, 447–448, 459–461 scour problems for, 354–356 seismic design of, 356–357 seismic retrofit of, 356–358 span lengths for, 336, 344, 345 span types for: continuous, 313, 335–336, 344 simple, 335–336 superstructure of, 327–328 types of: composite, 336, 341–342 jointless, 331, 335 prestressed concrete box-beam, 337–338 prestressed concrete I-beam, 338–339 reinforced concrete flat-slab, 336–337 steel arch, 336 steel beam, 339–340 steel box girder, 343–344 steel cable-stayed, 336 steel plate girder, 340-343 steel suspension, 336 steel truss, 320, 336, 346 widening of, 344, 346

Collector-distributor roads: design, 137 function, 164, 173 separation distance, 173 terminals, 171, 175, 176–178 (See also Service roads) Concrete: admixtures, 316, 317, 321, 322, 325, 326 air entrainment for, 317 alkali-silica reaction in, 316 bridge barriers, 330–331 (See also Bridges, railings for) bridge decks: design of, 323–324 cast-in-place, 321, 324 construction of, 324–325 forms for, 321, 323, 324–325 grid, filled, 322 joints in, 330–335 overlays for, 316, 317, 321, 327, 332, 338 precast, 321–322, 324–325 prestressed, 321–322, 324–325 Concrete, bridge decks (Cont.): protection of, 325–327 (See also Bridges) bridge parapets, 330–331 (See also Bridges, railings for) bridges: advantages of, 328 types of, 336–339 (See also Bridges) cracking in, 316–317, 322, 324, 330–331, 338 dense, 317, 318, 327 durability of, 316–318, 321, 322 flexural strength, 264–265 fly ash in, 55, 58–59, 61

839

freeze-thaw of, 316, 318 high performance, 317–318, 321, 325 latex-modified, 317, 327 lightweight, 318 modulus of elasticity, 264 modulus of rupture, 264–265 permeability in, 316, 317, 318, 321, 325 reinforcement for: cathodic protection of, 321, 325, 326–327 corrosion of, 321, 322, 324, 325–327 design of, 323–324 epoxy-coated, 321, 326 galvanized, 321, 326 sealers for, 316, 325 shrinkage in, 316–317, 318, 330–331 silica fume, 54, 317, 321, 327 spalling of, 324, 325, 332 waterproofing membranes for, 321, 325–326, 327, 338 Construction plans: CADD systems: layers, 213 levels, 213 overview, 210–213 components: calculations, 217 cross sections, 213, 217, 220 details, 217 drainage, 217 notes, 213 plans, 213–217 profiles, 217, 219 schematic plan, 213, 215 sections, 213, 216, 217, 220 special sheets, 217 storm water plan, 217 summary, 213, 217, 218


Construction plans, components (Cont.): title sheet, 213, 214 traffic maintenance, 213 preparation: purpose, 209 tracing material, 210 Consultants: responsibilities of, 312 use of, 311–312 Council on Environmental Quality, 3, 5 Crash cushions: characteristics of, 526–529, 532 maintenance of, 530–531, 532 placement of, 532 selection of, 532 types of, 526–529, 532 (See also Barriers, end treatments for) Cross section design: bridges, at, 137, 138–139 curbs: guiderails, relation to, 145 justification for, 142 position, 142, 145 ramps, 146 transitions, 145 types, 142 (See also grading, curbs, below) grading: barrier, 127 barriers, earth, 131, 133 benches, 128, 130–133 channels, parallel, 130–131, 133 clear zone, 120, 121, 123–126, 128, 131, 133, 134, 138, 139 crossroads, 128, 132 curbs, 128, 134 diamond interiors, 133, 136–137 ditches, traversable, 125, 126, 131 driveways, 128, 134 gore area, 133 interchanges, 132, 135, 136, 137, 140 loop interiors, 136 median, special, 127, 133 ramp, 132 safety, 124, 129, 130 slope rounding, 120, 126, 127 slopes, 122–137 standard, 126, 132 trumpet interiors, 133, 135 (See also Safety, roadside) lanes, number of, 117 lanes, width of, 118, 119–122 Cross section design (Cont.): medians: function of, 137 types, 137, 140–142 U-turns through, 142–143 width, 137, 140 pedestrian facilities: border, 146 bridges, on, 146 bridges, under, 146 curb ramps, 146 disabled access, 146 tree lawn, 146, 147 walks, 145, 146, 147

840

roadways: crowns, 118 horizontal curves, 118, 123, 124 lane shifting rate, 118 lane transitions, 118 lane widths, 118, 119–122 pavement cross slopes, 118 shoulder grade breaks, 122, 126–128 shoulder width, 119–122, 125 shoulders, 119, 122 service, level of, 117 Cultural resources (see Historic resources) Culverts: classification of, 418 construction methods for: camber, 462, 463 directional drilling, 464 embankment installations, 462 jacking, 462–463 microtunneling, 464 soil stabilization, 464 trench installations, 462 tunneling, 462–463, 464 (See also installation of, below) flexible, structural design of: area of cross section, 440, 449 backfill requirements, 461–462 bedding requirements, 461–462 boxes, 447–448 considerations in, 438, 439, 441 deflection, 453, 455–456, 457 examples of, 442–446, 454–455 flexibility factors, 443 installation requirements, 461–464 load factor design for, 445–446 long-span structures, 447–448 mechanical properties, 442–443, 449–450 modulus of soil reaction, 456, 457


Culverts, flexible, structural design of (Cont.): moment of inertia, 440, 449 pipe arches, 446–447 pressure distribution, 446–447 ribs and lagging, 456, 458–459 seam strength, 441–443 service load design for, 442–445 soil modulus, 451 tunnel liners, 456, 458–459 hydraulic design of: considerations in, 388–391 critical depth in, 397–398, 400 (See also Open channels, flow in) discharge velocity in, 400–403 energy dissipation in, 400–403 entrance loss coefficients for, 389, 391–394 entrance transitions in, 389–390 inlet control in, 389–394 long-span structures, 399–400 outlet control in, 391-393, 395–397 size determination in, 395–397 submerged outlets in, 397 inspection of: considerations in, 464–466 elements included in, 466–467 flexible pipe, 467–468 National Bridge Inspection Program, 465, 466 piping, 465, 466, 467, 468 rigid pipe, 468–469 installation of: backfill, 418–420, 461–462 bedding, 418–420, 461–462 flexible pipe, 418–420, 461–462 rigid pipe, 418–420, 461–462 (See also construction methods for, above) loads on: dead, 418–420 earth, 418–424, 442, 450–452 impact, 423–424, 441 live, 418–419, 423–424, 426–427, 431–432, 441, 450 prism, 422–423 rehabilitation of: considerations in, 470 flexible pipe, 470–472 relining, 472 rigid pipe, 470, 472 shotcrete lining, 472 Culverts (Cont.): rigid, structural design of: backfill requirements, 418–420 bedding requirements, 418–420 boxes, 437–438 cast-in-place pipe, 438, 439 considerations, 424–437 direct design for, 424–426, 433–437 D-load design for (see indirect design for, below) example of, 430, 433 indirect design for, 424–425, 430–433 installation requirements, 418–420, 425–426 pressure distributions, 427–428, 438–439 SIDD model for, 425–426, 427–430, 431, 437 three-edge bearing test for, 422–423, 430, 431, 432 three-sided, 437–438 selection guidelines for: abrasion, 414–415

841

aluminum pipe, 417 concrete pipe, 415 plastic pipe, 417 protective coatings, 417 steel pipe, 415–418 service life of: abrasion effects in, 414–415 design value for, 413, 417 environmental effects in, 413–414 (See also inspection of, above) types of: aluminum, 407, 410 box, 404–405, 410 cast-in-place, 403–404 concrete, 403–406 concrete, factory-made, 403, 405 corrugated metal, 406–410 long-span structures, 410, 411 pipe-arches, 407, 410 plastic, 412 polyethylene, 412 polyvinyl chloride, 412 spiral rib, 407–408, 410 steel, 406–411 structural plate, 410 three-sided, 404–405 tunnel liners, 410–411 (See also Safety, roadside, drainage systems; Storm water systems)


Drainage, roadway, design of: considerations in, 379–381 culverts, 385–386 (See also storm drains, below; Culverts; Storm water systems) curbs and gutters, 381–385 design spread, 380–381 design storm, 380–381 guidelines, 379–381 inlets, 381–385 slotted drains, 383–385 storm drains, 385–386 (See also Culverts; Storm water systems) subgrade drains, 386, 387–388 subsurface drains, 386–387 underdrains, 386, 387 Driveways: commercial, 188, 191, 192 industrial, 191, 192, 193 location of, 183, 184 profiles for, 187, 192, 193, 194–195 rural, 184, 185 service station, 184–188, 189–191 shopping center, 191, 192, 193 urban, 184, 185, 186, 187

Embankment slopes, safety considerations for (see Safety, roadside) Endangered species, 2, 6, 13, 14, 24, 28, 34–35 (See also Land use) Environmental impact: air quality, 2, 6, 13, 23–26 context sensitive design, 5, 13 cumulative effects, 19, 40 erosion, 31–33 floodplains, 13, 23, 25, 34 hazardous waste, 13, 35–39, 40, 43 historic sites, 3–4, 13, 15, 24, 25, 38–39 mitigation measures, 6, 10, 12, 15, 18–21, 38, 61 noise, 2, 6, 8–9, 13, 24, 26 Environmental impact statement (see National Environmental Policy Act) Environmental issues, 1–66 Environmental Protection Agency, 3, 24 28

Fatalities: rate, 473–474 roadside: caused by fixed objects, 474, 483, 488, 490 caused by supports, 483, 488 Fatalities, roadside (Cont.): causes of, 473–475 reduction in, 473–475 Floodplains: environmental impact on, 13, 23, 34 environmental regulations, 23, 25, 34 only-practical-alternative finding for, 34 (See also Land use)

842

Forgiving roadside concept, 474

Geometric design: alignment, horizontal: considerations, 78, 85–87, 109–110 curves, 85–88 deflection angle, 85–86 function of, 85 vertical alignment, coordination with, 115, 117 alignment, vertical: considerations, 78, 110–113 curves, 112–115 grade, critical length of, 110, 111, 112 grade, maximum, 110, 111 grade, minimum, 110 grade, tangent, 110, 111 grade breaks, 112–113 horizontal alignment, coordination with, 115, 117 stopping distance, 110–115 controls for: categories, 76 design features, 77 exceptions, 78 functional classification, 76, 78 relationships, 78 speed, 78 terrain classification, 77 traffic data, 76–77 traffic numbers, 77 sight distance, decision: defined, 84 examples of, 84 required, 86 traffic controls, 85 sight distance, intersection, 81, 82, 83–84 sight distance, passing, 81, 82, 84 sight distance, stopping, 79–81 superelevation: centrifugal force, 87–88, 101 climate, effect of, 87 curvature, maximum, 87–88, 101 defined, 87


Geometric design, superelevation (Cont.): design factors, 87 determination methods, 88–89 elevations, 106 equation, 87 friction, effects of, 87–89, 101 friction factors, 87–88 grade, effect of, 101 horizontal curves, between, 106, 108–109 low-speed roadways, for, 101, 102, 106 position, 105, 106 profiles, 106 radius, horizontal, minimum, 87, 89–101 rates, 87–101 runoff, 101–109 selection factors, 87 spiral, Euler, 109 spirals, on, 105, 106, 109 tangent runout, 101, 105–106 terrain, effect of, 87 transition, 101, 106 Geotechnical (see Retaining walls, foundations; Rock; Soil)

Hazardous waste: environmental control legislation for: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 24, 36–37, 41 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, 3, 4, 55 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 24, 36, 40–41, 54–55, 61, 64, 66 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 24, 36–37, 41 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 24, 36 environmental impact of, 35–36, 40, 41, 43, 46, 48, 51, 52 (See also National Environmental Policy Act) paint, from (see Lead-based paint) recycling of, 52–66 (See also Waste materials) High-occupancy vehicle lanes: arterial streets, on: categories, 202–203 center lane, in, 202–203, 210, 211 concurrent flow, 200, 202–203, 207–208, 212 contraflow, 200, 202–203, 209, 212 traffic control, 200–203 High-occupancy vehicle lanes (Cont.): concept, 199 freeways, on: concurrent flow, 200, 202 connections, 200, 204–205 contraflow, 200, 202 cross sections, 200–202, 203, 207–210 signing, 200, 206 speed, 199, 200 width, 200, 201–202 goals, 199 implementation guidelines, 199–200 operations, 200 passenger loads, 200 planning, 199–200 Historic resources: environmental evaluation of, 38–39 environmental impact on, 2–6, 13–15, 19, 24–25, 38–39 environmental legislation to protect:

843

American Indian Religious Freedom Act, 24, 38 Archeological and Historical Preservation Act, 24, 38 Archeological Resources Act, 24, 38 Historic Sites and Buildings Act, 24 National Historical Preservation Act, 4, 24, 38–39 National Register of Historical Places, 14 Native American Graves Act, 38 Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, 25 (See also National Environmental Policy Act) Hydrology: computer models, 369 defined, 359 design storm, 361, 363 flood frequency, 361, 362 runoff estimation: example of, 369–370 intensity-duration-frequency curve for, 363 peak flow equations for, 362–363 rational method for, 362–363 runoff coefficients for, 363–365 statistical methods for, 361–362 time of concentration, estimation of: example of, 369–370 kinematic wave equation for, 365–366 Kirpich equation for, 367–368 National Resource Conservation Service (NCRS) method for, 369


Hydrology, time of concentration, estimation of (Cont.): overland flow in, 363–367 Williams equation for, 368–369 watershed characteristics: features and orientation, 360 topographic divide, 360 water, storage of, 360

Intelligent vehicle highway systems: commercial vehicles, 197, 198 defined, 197 electronic payment, 197, 198 emergency management, 197, 198 goals, 197 safety systems, 197–198 traffic management, 197–198 transportation management, 197–198 user services, 197–198 Interchanges: defined, 163 ramps: classification of, 166–171 grade intersections, 173, 174 speed, 164, 166 superelevation, 172–173 terminals, 166–173 vertical curvature, 173 spacing, 163 types of, 164 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), 4, 6, 55 Intersections: design considerations, 147–164 drainage, 155 horizontal alignment, 149, 150 islands, 155–156 lanes at: bicycle, 162 left turn, 156–159 left turn, two-way, 163 right turn, 157, 159–160 taper of, 156, 157 through, 160 lighting, 162 pedestrians, 160 radius, 152–155 recovery area, 160 roadway, major, 149 roadway, minor, 149 sight distance, 82, 149 traffic control, 148–149 traffic volume, 148 Intersections (Cont.): turning templates, 153–155 types of, 148 vehicle types, 148 vertical alignment, 149, 151–152 (See also Geometric design)

Land use: environmental evaluation of, 2, 3, 6, 11, 13, 26, 35, 37 recreation, for, 2, 3, 6, 15, 37–38

844

special, environmental legislation governing: Department of Transportation Act, 1, 3–4, 24 Executive Orders, 3, 23, 25 Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA), 24, 37 Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, 24, 37 Federal Endangered Species Act, 6, 14, 24, 34–35 Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 24, 37 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 24, 37–38 Floodplain Management, 25, 34 Protection of Wetlands, 23, 25, 33 Rivers and Harbors Act, 24, 35 Lead-based paint: biohazards, 40, 41 debris from, recovery of, 41, 42, 49, 50, 52 environmental regulations on, 40–42 overcoating of, 43 removal of: blast cleaning, 40–51, 56 chemical, 45, 47, 48 community relations on, 50 containment for, 48–53 hand tool, 44, 47 monitoring, 43, 49–52 power tool, 44–45, 47 project management for, 52 protection during, 41–42 specifications for, 51, 53 sponge jet, 45, 47 water jet, 44, 46–47 repainting, 43 toxicity testing, 40–41 use of, 39–40 Life cycle cost (LCC) analysis (see Value engineering) Lighting: benefits, 615–616, 623 bridges, 623


Lighting (Cont.): classifications: area, 619 roadway, 618–619 walkway, 619 design values: bridges, 623 freeways, 622, 623–624 highways, 623–624 overpasses, 623 special cases, 624 streets, 624 transitions, 623 illuminance, 616, 624 luminance, 616, 624 rest areas, 626–627 transition, 623 tunnels, 624–626 visibility, 616–617, 624, 626, 635 warrants for: analytical method, 628–637 conditions, 620–622, 623–624 freeways, 620–622 highways, 623–624 interchanges, complete, 620 interchanges, partial, 621 special cases, 622 streets, 626 tunnels, 624 (See also Luminaires; Poles, luminaire) Luminaire supports (see Supports) Luminaires: cobra head, 628, 635, 638 connectors, 641, 644, 647, 651 construction of: barriers, on, 649–651, 654 bridges, on, 649–651 conduits, 649–651 fuses, 641, 644, 652, 653 high mast: advantages, 635–636, 654 connection, power, 651 design, 635–636, 637 lowering devices, 627, 628, 633, 651 offset, 629, 633 wattage, 618, 626, 628 location, 628, 635–636 maintenance, 652 reflectors, segmented, 633, 635 tests, acceptance, 651–652 voltage, 640, 652 wiring, 640–645 (See also Lighting; Poles, luminaire)

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): categorical exclusion, 6–10 decision, record of, 7, 15, 22 emergency actions, 8 environmental assessment: contents, 10–11 Council on Environmental Quality, role of, 3, 5, 9, 12, 18, 19, 20

845

format, 10–11 impacts, 12–14 intensity, 12–13 mitigation measures, 12–14 project description, 11–12 purpose, 11 environmental impact statement, draft: affected environment, 19 alternatives, 18, 19 consequences, 19 cover sheet, 18 format, 17–20 index, 20 mitigation measures, 19–20 need, 18 preparers, 20 purpose, 18 summary, 18 environmental impact statement, final, 7, 20–21 environmental impact statement, supplemental, 22 environmental reevaluation, 22 exempt actions, 4, 6, 7, 9–10 exemptions, express statutory, 8 impact, no significant, finding of, 7, 10, 15 intent, notice of, 7, 14, 15–16 overview, 5–6 process steps, 5–23 public involvement, 7, 10–21 review, 6–11, 14–17, 20 scoping, 7, 10, 15–19 supporting documents, 20 National Highway System Designation Act, 5 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), 27–28, 31–33 National Priorities List (NPL), 36 Natural resources (see Land use) Noise: diffracted, 776–777 environmental impact of, 2, 6, 8, 13, 23–24, 26 Noise Control Act (NCA), 26 reflected, 776, 777


Noise (Cont.): source, 776, 780 transmitted, 776, 777 (See also Noise barriers) Noise barriers: aesthetics, 779, 780–783 construction of, 792–795 contracts for, 792–795 cost benefits for, 779–780 cost factors for, 780 design criteria for, 790 design of: acoustical, 777–778 examples of, 781–783, 791–792 foundation, 791–792 general, 785–787 structural, 787–790 graffiti on, 781, 785 height of, 776–777, 780–782 landscaping for, 780–781, 786 loadings: combinations of, 790 seismic, 790 wind, 787–790 maintenance of, 779, 780, 784–785 materials for: brick, 778 concrete, 778, 781–783, 784 criteria for, 780 earth berm, 778, 779, 784 masonry, 778, 782, 785 measurement of, 795 payment for, 795 project development for, 785–787 safety considerations for, 784 selection of, 778–780 site, 780, 793 steel, 779 termination of, 781, 784 wood, 778, 779, 782, 783, 784, 792–795 Noise walls (see Noise barriers)

Open channels: design of: channel protection in, 372–373 considerations in, 371–372 realignment in, 372 shore protection in, 372–373 velocity in, recommended, 371–372 flow in: continuity equation for, 374 control points, 378 critical depth of, 376–379 Open channels, flow in (Cont.): critical slope of, 376–377 critical velocity of, 376–379 energy equation for, 374, 375, 376–377 Froude number for, 379 hydraulic grade line for, 374, 375, 376–377 Manning’s equation for, 374, 375, 376 roughness coefficients for, 374, 376 steady, 373 types of, 373

846

uniform, 373 unsteady, 373 (See also Culverts, hydraulic design of)

Pavement: asphalt concrete (see flexible, below) composite: composition of, 233 coring of, 289–290, 291 design of, 233 distress in, 288, 301 elastic layer theory for, 233 joints in, 234, 294 reflective cracking in, 233 coring, 289–291 design of: basis for, 223 California bearing ratio, 249, 292, 293 drainage coefficient, 265 equivalency factor, 236–254 lane distribution factor, 237 material properties in, 264–265 modulus of subgrade reaction, 226–227, 258–264 present serviceability index, 235–236 present serviceability rating, 235–236 procedures for, 257–270 reliability, 240, 243 resilient modulus, 246, 249, 252, 255, 257, 258, 266, 269, 272 safety factor, 240, 243 serviceability, 235–236 serviceability loss, 265, 266 serviceability, terminal, 236, 265 single-axle loading, equivalent, 236, 237, 240, 255, 256, 265, 266 standard deviation, 240–243 structural number, 236, 270 traffic, design, 236, 237, 240 traffic loading, 236, 237, 240 Unified Soil Classification in, 252, 255


Pavement (Cont.): deterioration of: classification of, 270 environmental, 270 functional, 270 measurement methods for, 273 structural, 270 (See also distress in continuously reinforced concrete, below; distress in flexible, below; distress in rigid, below) distress in continuously reinforced concrete: punchouts, 282, 283 settlement, 280 transverse cracking, 281, 283 (See also distress in rigid, below) distress in flexible: bleeding, 283, 284 corrugations, 284, 285 cracking, block, 285, 287 cracking, edge, 288 cracking, longitudinal, 284, 286 cracking, transverse, 284, 285, 286 cracking, wheel track, 286, 287 investigative methods for, 288–296, 297–298 potholes, 284 raveling, 282, 283 rutting, 284, 285 distress in rigid: corner breaks, 276, 280, 281 cracking, longitudinal, 280 cracking, transverse, 279, 280 faulting, 225, 226, 276, 278 investigative methods for, 288–296, 297–298 joint spalling, 224, 230, 278–279, 281 popouts, 276, 277 pumping, 263, 276 settlements, 278 surface deterioration, 274, 277 flexible: composition of, 232 coring of, 289, 291 design procedure for, 266–270 material for, 270 reclaimed, 56, 65 recycled materials in, 62, 65 scrap tires in, 55, 62, 65 structural number for, 270 thickness of, 270, 276 types of, 232–233 (See also distress in flexible, above; rehabilitation of flexible, below) Pavement (Cont.): jointed rigid: blowups of, 224 contraction joints in, 224–225, 227, 230–231 cracking of, 224–227 design relationships for, 226–227 details, 227, 228–229 doweled joints in, 224–226 expansion joints in, 224 jointing layouts, 228–229 intersections in, 228–229 modulus of subgrade reaction, 227, 258–264 pressure spalling of, 224 radius of relative stiffness, 226–227

847

reinforcement in, 224–226 saw cuts in, 224–225, 227 undowelled joints in, 224 Westergaard theory for, 226–227 (See also design of, above; rigid, below; rigid, joint seals in, below) life cycle cost analysis of, 306–309 (See also Value engineering, life cycle cost analysis in) management of, 270–273 overlay of: rehabilitation, 280, 298–300 thickness, 299, 306 (See also Pavement, composite) preventive maintenance of: benefits of, 301 chip sealing, 303 crack sealing, 301–303 fog sealing, 303–305 microsurfacing, 305–306 rehabilitation of flexible: asphalt overlay, 233, 298–301 whitetopping, 301 rehabilitation of rigid: break and seat, 299 concrete overlay, bonded, 299 concrete overlay, unbonded, 300 crack and seat, 299 overlay, asphalt, 298–300 overlay, concrete, 299, 300 repair, 298–300 restoration, 296, 298 rubblize and roll, 299–300 requirements of, 227 research, 234–235


Pavement (Cont.): rigid: continuously reinforced, 224, 231, 280–283 coring of, 289–290 cracking in, 224, 226–227 design procedure for, 257–266 details of, 227, 228–229 dowels in, 224, 225 fly ash in, 55, 58 intersections of, 227–229 joint layout in, 227–229 joints in, 224, 227–229 reclaimed, 57, 65 recycled materials in, 65 reinforcing in, 224–227, 231, 266 silica fume in, 54 thickness of, 266 types of, 224 (See also distress in rigid, above; jointed rigid, above; rehabilitation of rigid, above) rigid, joint seals in: design of, 227, 230–231 field-molded type, 230–231 friction coefficient, 230 movement, 230 preformed compression type, 231, 232 purpose, 227 sealant reservoir in, 225, 230 shrinkage coefficient, 230–231 thermal coefficient, 230–231 road tests, 234–235, 236, 243 types of, 224 Planning, transportation: design phase: criteria, 68 examples of, 68–69 reviews, 70–76 environmental concerns: air quality, 69 endangered species, 69 farmlands, 69 historic, 69 natural areas, 69 parks, 69 prehistoric, 69 recreation, 69 scenic rivers, 70 streams, 70 water quality, 70 wetlands, 70 (See also Environmental impact) Planning, transportation (Cont.): multimodal system, 67 preliminary development phase: alternatives, 69–70 information gathering, 69 project inventory, 69 project types, 69 public hearings, 69, 70 program development: contract award, 76 goals, 67 objectives, 67 project evaluation:

848

criteria, 68 examples of, 68–69 phases, 68–69 statewide, 67 Poles, luminaire: bases: direct burial, 646 flange, 646 frangible coupler, 647 shear, 648 slip, 647–648 transformer, 644, 647 breakaway type, 628, 636–637, 638, 639, 646–648, 653–655 design, structural, 655 foundations, 642–645, 649–651, 654 hazard, electrical, 640–641 impact performance, 653–655 location, 638–639 mass, maximum, 653 safety considerations, 640–641 types: aluminum, 639 concrete, 639–640 fiberglass, 639 steel, 639 steel, stainless, 639 wood, 639 (See also Lighting; Luminaires)

Railings, bridge (see Bridges, railing retrofits for; Bridges, railings for) Resource recovery (see Waste material) Retaining walls: anchored: description, 743 design, 746–748 drainage, 746 loadings, 744–746


Retaining walls, anchored (Cont.): pressure, earth, 661, 744–746 settlement, 663 stability, 746 backfill: friction angle, 663, 671, 693, 696, 708, 714, 720, 752 gradation, 663, 696, 707 plasticity, 663, 685, 686, 697, 707, 751 properties, 663, 675 (See also cantilever, gravity type, below; mechanically stabilized earth, below; soil, below) cantilever, gravity type: backfill, 693 design, 693–697 load cases, 693 pressure, 661 shear key, 690, 693, 696–699 toe depth, 662 toe width, 693–694 worksheet, 667 (See also backfill, above; rigid, below) cantilever, nongravity type: anchors, corrosion of, 743 defined, 738 design, 742 drainage, 741 pressure, earth, 738–741 pressure, water, 741 stability, 742 surcharge loads, 741 classification, 658–660 construction time, 663, 669 cost, 665, 669, 681 cut retention, for, 663–664 design: checks, 670 life, 663, 713 (See also anchored, above; cantilever, gravity type, above; cantilever, nongravity type, above; mechanically stabilized earth, below; rigid, below; selection, below; soil nailed, below) earth pressures on: calculation of, 673–681 Coulomb theory of, 670–671, 673, 679, 680–681, 738 estimation of, 661 Rankine theory of, 671, 673, 675, 677–679, 693–694 Retaining walls, earth pressures on (Cont.): restraint effect, 672–673 states of, 671–673 externally stabilized, 658–660 facing systems: concrete, cast-in-place, 698–699, 703, 704, 753, 760–766 concrete, precast, 698, 699, 700–705, 753, 759 fabric, 704 gabions, 704 metallic, 703 plastic, 704 shotcrete, 703 welded wire, 704 fill retention, for, 663

849

foundations: bearing capacity, 662, 670, 684–685, 687, 705 bearing pressure, 662, 711, 712, 721 borings, 681–682 deep, 660, 663, 673, 681 drilling, core, 682 exploration, subsurface, 681–682 investigations, 681–682 Meyerhof equation, 661, 706, 711, 712, 721 pile, 658, 660, 663, 690, 691 settlement, 662–663, 670, 673, 681, 690, 691 types, 660 (See also Rock; Soil) gabions, 658, 663, 691 gravity, 658 (See also cantilever, gravity type, above) hybrid, 658, 662, 668 internally stabilized, 658, 660 mechanically stabilized earth (MSE): advantages, 699 backfill, 707, 714, 716 bridge abutment, 757–758, 767–772 California type, 700–701 comparison with soil nailed wall, 752 components, 698, 701–705 construction time, 663 design, 705–738 design example, metal reinforcement, 716–727 design example, polymeric reinforcement, 730–733, 737–738 dimensions, 705


Retaining walls, mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) (Cont.): durability, metal reinforcement, 713–716, 724–727 durability, polymeric reinforcement, 716, 727–728 facings, 701–705 Georgia type, 700–701 Hilfiker, 699–700 history of, 699–701 Lane, 700 Maccaferri, 701 Reinforced Earth, 657, 699–700 reinforcement, metal, 699–701, 716–727 reinforcement, polymeric, 698–701 rigid type, 691 settlement, 663 stability, 705–707 superimposed, 711–712 terraced, 711–713 types, 698–701 VSL, 699–700 (See also facing systems, above) modular, 658, 663, 767 nongravity, 658, 660 (See also cantilever, nongravity type, above) pressure, hydrostatic, 661, 699 purpose, 657, 660 rigid: defined, 690 design, 690–697 examples, 691 overturning, 691 rotation, 691, 693 settlement, 691 sliding, 691 (See also foundations, above; cantilever, gravity type, above) selection: constraints, aesthetic, 664 constraints, behavioral, 661–664 constraints, economic, 664 constraints, environmental, 664 constraints, spatial, 660–661 evaluation factors, 665 objectives, design, 660 process, 660–670 work sheets, 665–668 semigravity, 658–660, 667, 692 slip circle analysis, 691 Retaining walls (Cont.): soil nailed: construction, 749–751, 757–759 contracting, 766–767 description, 749–751 design, 753–757, 759–766 design example, 759–766 drainage, 753 MSE walls, comparison with, 752 soils for, 751–752 stability, 753–756, 766 success factors, 751 use, 749 space limitations, 661–662 terminology, 690, 743 use, 657 Rock: classification, 686–689

850

core drilling, 682 quality, 682 (See also Soil)

Safety, roadside: barriers (see Barriers, roadside) benefits from, 473–475 clear zone concept in, 475–483 concepts of, 473–475 drainage systems: bridges, on, 347–348 cross drains, 481–482 curbs, 479–481 design options for, 482 drop inlets, 483 extension of, 482 parallel drains, 483 shielding of, 483 supports located in, 484 traversable slopes, on, 482 (See also Culverts) embankment slopes: backslopes, 478 barrier placement on, 515–517, 520 channels on, 479, 480, 481 critical, 475–476, 478 foreslopes, 475–478 nonrecoverable, 475–476 recoverable, 475–476 transverse, 478–479 traversability of, 475–479 types of, 475 obstacles, 474–475, 483–491 trees, 488


Service roads, 181 (See also Collector-distributor roads) Sign panels: coatings, protective, 605 fastening: bolts, 588–592 guidelines, 592–593 height, 588, 598–602 multiple supports, to, 602–604 pipe, 589, 591 posts, wood, 589 requirements, 588, 592–593, 598–602 rules, 588 steel shapes, 589–592 stiffeners, 601 tubes, 589–591 U-channels, 589, 590 repair of: retroflective aluminum, 610 retroflective plywood, 610–611 torsional strength, 543 Sign supports: aluminum, 543, 547 classification, 547 construction of: anchor systems, 575 embedment, 575 height, 575, 588, 602–603 location, 574–576, 602, 604 multiple-mount systems, 602, 604 placement, 574–576, 602, 604 vehicle deceleration, 541, 568, 575 (See also slip bases for, below; installation, below) design of (see construction of, above; multiple mount, below; single mount, below) frangible couplers for, 565, 570–572, 594–596 installation: frangible couplers, 594–596 hinges, 597–601 multiple mount, 594–598 pipe, steel, 561–562, 582–584, 585 posts, wood, 555–557, 582, 583, 584 slip bases, 584–588, 596–597, 599–601 tubes, steel, 558–561, 580–582 U-channels, steel, 551–555, 576–580 maintenance: importance of, 574 support straightening, 611 Sign supports (Cont.): multiple-mount: bidirectional base, 568 design, 566–574 FHWA approval for, 568 hinges, 567–568, 573–574 multidirectional base, 568 required, when, 568 retrofits, 573–574 spacing, 567 slip bases for, 567, 569–570 unidirectional base, 568 (See also installation, above) pipe, steel: anchors, 561–562

851

breakaway, 561 embedment, 561 sign area for, maximum, 561 sizes, 561 posts, wood: breakaway, 555–557 embedment, 555–556 engineered type, 557 pole type, 557 shaped type, 555–557 sizes, 555, 567 S-shape, steel, 569–570 single mount: anchor stubs, 551 base-bending type, 543–544, 548–549, 551–552 breakaway type, 540–546, 549–550, 552–553 components, 547 design, 546–562 embedment, 548, 550–551, 552–553, 555, 558, 561 FHWA approval, 550 foundations for, 550 mechanical release type, 550 mounting height, 561 selection, 550–551 sign panels for, 547 slip bases for: bolt torque, 584–585, 586 components, 562 design, 565–566 foundations, 588 function, 562, 584 horizontal, 563, 565, 570–572, 585 inclined, 562, 563–564, 565, 570, 585 installation, 574–588


Sign supports, slip bases for (Cont.): keeper plates for, 562, 565, 585, 596 multidirectional, 563–565, 588 orientation, 586–588 sign area, maximum, 566 unidirectional, 563, 564 weight, maximum supported, 566 (See also frangible couplers, above) structural requirements, 543 (See also design of, above) tubes, steel: anchors, 585–561 breakaway, 558–560, 569 embedment, 558–561 sign area, maximum, 558 sizes, 558 (See also installation, above) U-channels, steel: anchor, 552–553 base bending, 552 breakaway, 552–553 characteristics, 543–544, 551–552 dual, 568 embedment, 552–553 mechanical properties, 551 sign area for, maximum, 552 sizes, 551–552 splices, 552–555 (See also installation, above) W-shape, steel, 569–570 (See also Signing; Signs; Supports) Signal supports (see Supports) Signing: benefit-cost ratio, 535 expectations, 533 hazards, 534, 535, 536, 537, 540, 541, 545 legal responsibility: liability, 535–536, 604 minimization, 536 negligence, 535–536, 604 sovereign immunity, 535 tort elements, 535 uniformity: benefits of, 534 deviations from, 534–535 state application of, 536 (See also Sign supports; Signs) Signs: antitheft devices, 606–608 categorized, 543 components, 547 height, 539, 545 large, 543, 545 Signs (Cont.): letters for, 536, 539 location, 536–537, 539, 545, 575 maintenance of: cleaning, 609–610 patching, 610–611 purpose, 608–609 repair, 609, 610–611 replacement, 609

852

support straightening, 611 need, 542–543 number of, 542–543 small, 543 structural requirements, 543–545 vandalism of: categories, 604 costs, 604 destruction, 604 mutilation, 604–605 reduction in, 605–608 theft, 605 (See also maintenance of, above) warning, 534–535, 536–539, 574 warrants for, 543, 617 (See also Sign panels; Sign supports; Signing; Supports) Social factors, environmental evaluation of, 19 Soil: adhesion, 673, 676 analysis, 683–685 borings, 682 classification, 675, 684, 685, 689 coarse-grained, 685 cohesion, 671–672, 676, 688 consistency, 682 consolidation, 682, 690 density, 682 fine-grained, 684, 685 friction angle, 663, 671, 693, 714–716 gradation, 686 grain size, 686, 689 porosity, 682–683 properties, 673, 675, 682–683 samplers, tube, 682 shear strength, 689 tests: Atterberg limit, 685, 686 compression, unconfined, 682, 688 consolidation, 682 friction angle, 707, 714 hydrometer analysis, 686 liquid limit, 684, 685, 686 penetration, standard, 682


Soil, tests (Cont.): plastic limit, 684, 685, 686 plasticity index, 685 shear, direct, 687 shear, triaxial, 687 sieve analysis, 686, 689 unconfined compression, 688 void ratio, 683 weight-volume relationships, 683 (See also Rock) Speed: crawl, 77 design, 78 Storm drains (see Culverts; Drainage; Storm water systems) Storm water systems: construction of, notice of intent for, 28, 31 discharge into, control procedures for, 32, 33 environmental regulations for, 24, 26–32 environmental report on, annual, 28, 33 permits for: comprehensive, 33 construction, 28, 31–32 municipal, 27–28, 33 (See also Culverts; Drainage) pollution prevention of, 26–33 Structural steel: A36, 318–320 A514, 318–320 A572, 318–320 A588, 318–320 A709, 318–320 A852, 318–320 bridges: advantages of, 328 types of, 339–341 (See also Bridges) high-strength, 318–320 HPS, 318–319 price of, 320 weathering, 318–320, 329–330 Supports, safety considerations for: aluminum, 543, 547 base-bending type, 543–544, 548–549, 552 breakaway type, 484–488, 540–546, 549–550, 552–553, 555–557, 559, 561, 569, 574, 581, 583, 584, 585, 594–596, 603 (See also Sign supports, frangible couplers for; Sign supports, slip bases for) clear zone, 540 crash tests, 484 design options, 484, 540 Supports, safety considerations for (Cont.): impact performance, 543–546 large signs, for, 484–486 luminaires, for, 486 overhead type, 484 pendulum tests, 484 placement, lateral, 545, 575 selection guidelines, 545 sign location, 539–540 small signs, for, 486 soil conditions, 544, 548, 550 specifications, 534, 541, 543 speed, effect of, 541–542

853

steel, 543 terrain, influence of, 545–546 testing guidelines, 541–542 traffic signals, for, 486, 488 traversable area, 540, 548, 575, 640 U-channels, 543, 551–555 utilities, 488 yielding type, 540–541, 543, 544

Tires, scrap: environmental legislation on, 36, 55 quantity of, 61 use of, 61–64, 65 Traffic: congestion: characterization, 195–196 cost, 195–196 demand-capacity graph, 196 types, 195 numbers: average daily traffic (ADT), 77 design hourly volume (DHV), 77 directional design hourly volume (DDHV), 77 truck percentage, 77 vehicle categories, 77 Transitions, multilane: converging roadways (see entrance ramps, below) diverging roadways (see exit ramps, below) entrance ramps: continuity, 175, 178 curvature, horizontal, 175 curvature, vertical, 179 design, 175, 178 joint location, 179 superelevation, 179 traffic flow, 175, 178


Transitions, multilane (Cont.): exit ramps: continuity, 179, 180 curvature, horizontal, 179–180 curvature, vertical, 181 design, 179–181 joint location, 181 superelevation, 181 terminals, 179–181 exits, left-hand, 175 exits, right-hand, 175 four lanes to two, 181, 182 Transportation Equity Act (TEA-21), 4, 6, 55

Value engineering: AASHTO role in: awards, 830, 832–833 benefits, 804–805 change proposals, 807–808 overview, 804 program elements, 804 study selection, 805–806 team structure, 806 training, 805 change proposals for, 801, 803, 804, 807–808 concept of, 797, 801 construction costs in, 798, 801, 806, 825, 826 contractor proposals for, 801, 803, 804–805, 807–808 cost model for, 825, 826 definition of, 797, 801 examples of: bridge construction, 832, 833 environmental impact, 832 geotechnical investigation, 832 light rail construction, 833 safety improvement, 833 FHWA role in: goals, 798 objectives, 798 overview, 797–798 policy, 800–803 quality, 788–799 review steps, 800 function analysis system technique (FAST) diagram for: construction of, 822–824 critical path in, 822 guidelines for, 821–822 purpose of, 820–821 summary of, 824–825 verb-noun method in, 820, 821 Value engineering (Cont.): job plan concept for, 808–809 job plan details for: acceptance enhancement in, 819 alternatives in, 815 analysis criteria in, 814 analysis phase of, 811, 812–814 analysis techniques in, 813 blast-create-refine method in, 812 creative phase of, 809, 811–812 development phase of, 815–816 human relations in, 810, 815 idea stimulators in, 811–814

854

implementation phase of, 819–820 information phase of, 810–811 information sources in, 810 information types in, 810 presentation phase of, 816–819 reports in, 816–817, 818, 819–820 testing in, 814, 815, 816 use of, 809 legislation on, 797, 800 life cycle cost (LCC) analysis in: annual recurring cost for, 829 annualized initial cost for, 829 annualized nonrecurring cost for, 829 calculation methods for, 829–830 considerations for, 826–828 cost categories for, 828 design life for, 827 discount rate for, 828 example of, 830, 831 federal rules for, 828 inflation effects for, 830 present worth for, 829 residual value for, 827, 828, 829 salvage value for, 827, 828, 829, 830 total annual cost for, 829 (See also Pavements, life cycle cost analysis of) origins of, 787 project selection for, 805–806 proposals for, 804, 807–808 SAVE, certification for, 805 savings from, 797, 798, 801–802, 803, 807, 832–833 state role in, 802–803 teams for, 806 U.S. DOT policy on, 797–803 workshops for, 798, 805 worth model for, 825–826


Walls, noise (see Noise barriers) Warning devices, supplemental, 534–535, 536–539 (See also Signs, warning) Waste material: coal ash, 57 economics of, 54 engineering properties of, 54 environmental legislation for: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), 4, 6, 55 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 24, 36, 41, 43, 54, 55 fly ash, 55, 57, 58, 60, 65 generation of, 55 oil, 66 pavement, asphalt, 56, 57 pavement, concrete, 57 plastics, 55, 60, 65 recycled: considerations in, 52–54 highway uses of, 36, 54–64 regulations on, 24, 54–55 research on, 55 Waste material (Cont.): slag, 57, 65 tires, 61–64 types of: agricultural, 59 construction, 55–56 domestic, 56–58 industrial, 57–59 mining, 58–59 (See also Hazardous wastes; Pavement, asphalt; Pavement, concrete; Tires, scrap) Wastewater, environmental regulations, 26–28 Water, fresh, environmental protective legislation for: Clean Water Act (CWA), 26–28, 42 Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 26–27 Safe Drinking Water Act, 24–34 Wetlands: environmental evaluation of, 12–13 legislation, 6, 34 only-practical-alternative finding, 34 (See also Land use) Wildlife, 3, 13, 15, 24, 34, 35, 38 (See also Land use)

855

Highway engineering handbook: building and rehabilitating the infrastructure

Highway Engineering Handbook

Highway Engineering Handbook, 2e

The Handbook of Highway Engineering